Chen Destroys the kata myth

Posted by: Chen Zen

Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 03:07 PM

Recently Ive been involved in several kata discussions, mainly involving Karateka. Trying not to steal threads I invited a few of them to the JKD forum to defend there stance on the issue. Since they have failed to do so then I will bring the conversation to them myself.

My first jab at it is that I dont think that kata are useful for anything other repetition of technique in which case there are far more valuable ways to do this. Also I believe that the mystery should be left out of it. There is too much interpretation for the student. Self defense should be taught in a more direct manner so that the benifits of such training can be yeilded quickly by the student.

Its just a jab. Ive got more. I want to remind everyone before the topic takes off, dont get personal. Lets have a intelligent discussion on the issue.
Posted by: Spade

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 03:20 PM

Quote:

Recently Ive been involved in several kata discussions, mainly involving Karateka. Trying not to steal threads I invited a few of them to the JKD forum to defend there stance on the issue. Since they have failed to do so then I will bring the conversation to them myself.

My first jab at it is that I dont think that kata are useful for anything other repetition of technique in which case there are far more valuable ways to do this. Also I believe that the mystery should be left out of it. There is too much interpretation for the student. Self defense should be taught in a more direct manner so that the benifits of such training can be yeilded quickly by the student.

Its just a jab. Ive got more. I want to remind everyone before the topic takes off, dont get personal. Lets have a intelligent discussion on the issue.





Round one, Fight!


"My first jab at it is that I dont think that kata are useful for anything other repetition of technique in which case there are far more valuable ways to do this."

That, in my opinon, is one of the main focuses of kata.

You do the technique over and over until its a reflex, like in my isshinryu sesian kata, the first movments goes as follows:

Left food forward, left side block, right punch, your right punch falls immeditaly into a side block, shoulder height, fist distance from your ribs, striking/blocking with the first two knuckles.

Doing the kata, you practice that technique a good deal.

While sparring, I've devolped the muscle memory to be able to step in, block, counter attack, and come back to a block. With as many times as I've practiced this motion, I have an extreamly high success rate when I need to perform it.

Kata keeps your techniques crisp, and teaches you how to flow from one technique to another.


If I may, what other methods do you perferr to hone technique?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 03:42 PM

Repetition is a huge part of any art. You gotta practice right? My thoughts are that kata arent neccessarily the fastest or best way to learn this.

You said "While SPARRING Ive developed the muscle memory..." Ah, but sparring is far from kata. And I believe that sparring is where the majority of the focus should be. And drilling. Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack. You have one place to go in kata to be performed "correctly" but in all reality, there are multiple angles for all techniques that can be considered "correct"
Posted by: Spade

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 03:55 PM

Quote:

Repetition is a huge part of any art. You gotta practice right? My thoughts are that kata arent neccessarily the fastest or best way to learn this.

You said "While SPARRING Ive developed the muscle memory..." Ah, but sparring is far from kata. And I believe that sparring is where the majority of the focus should be. And drilling. Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack. You have one place to go in kata to be performed "correctly" but in all reality, there are multiple angles for all techniques that can be considered "correct"





what I meant was "While I am sparring, I still have the muscle memory from doing kata" My mistake.


As far as the focus of training being on sparring, I once thought that too, however I realized that if you spar without having worked on technique, you will get sloppy, and have sloppy technique.

"Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack."

How is kata any different from shadow boxing? or doing a drill, I'm assuming, on a bag/pad?

Also, in my katas we change angles quite often, and do blocks/attacks from different angles all the time, its a very big part of the majority of my katas.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:01 PM

Chen

Problem is that I'm not sure that I really diagree with you.

In my view "most" problems with kata are, at base, really just poor understanding, poor application and poor instruction.

Kata are often improperly used--again in MY VIEW, by people that don't understand the process.

1-Kata is only a PART of training regimen that involves strenth training, hard, resistant partner drills, hitting various bags and striking tools, grappling, endurence training etc.

"Back in the day" that is how it was done.

Kata should only be PART of persons training.

Since I'm sure that you don't have problem with strentgh training or resistive drills---then that only leaves part of the training for folks to complain about.

So what your really discussing is bare percentages---I think its going to be pretty hard to argue about that.

2-Most people have it backwards---the kata should be simple meumonics to keep freash skills and lessons YOU ALREADY PRACTICE ON THE HEAVY BAG AND WITH RESISTANT PARTNERS.

Its a way to practice when you have no bag or partner---much as a boxer shadowboxes as part of his/her workout.

3-As to its ultility as a methed of training, kata, in various forms is probably the most widely used method of training extent--almost everybody, almost everywhere made use of some form of it.

4- Self defense is utterly situational/results focused thing.

If my training worked in a SD situation--then it worked--period.

Arguements about what "could" have been done "better" are nothing more than "what if" post-hoc rationaliztion.
If your training methods kept you in one piece, or enabled you to escape with your life--or just helped you survive--then they worked.

As an example, say I train totally kata based--you training without any kata at all.

We BOTH walk away from an violent encounter--more or less intact.

Then BOTH methods worked----the result is ONLY thing that counts--outside of an e-debate that is.

I certianly don't consider kata to the end all and be all lof practice--I personally get value out of it-so I practice it.

People should not use any form of practice that does not show gains.

Just my opinion, and that, just like my opinion of kata, will vary considerably person to person.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:16 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Repetition is a huge part of any art. You gotta practice right? My thoughts are that kata arent neccessarily the fastest or best way to learn this.

You said "While SPARRING Ive developed the muscle memory..." Ah, but sparring is far from kata. And I believe that sparring is where the majority of the focus should be. And drilling. Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack. You have one place to go in kata to be performed "correctly" but in all reality, there are multiple angles for all techniques that can be considered "correct"





what I meant was "While I am sparring, I still have the muscle memory from doing kata" My mistake.


As far as the focus of training being on sparring, I once thought that too, however I realized that if you spar without having worked on technique, you will get sloppy, and have sloppy technique.

"Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack."

How is kata any different from shadow boxing? or doing a drill, I'm assuming, on a bag/pad?

Also, in my katas we change angles quite often, and do blocks/attacks from different angles all the time, its a very big part of the majority of my katas.




Yes if you spar without drilling, bag work or shadow boxing then your sparring will be sloppy. However, those tools are used. And used to replace Kata.

How is kata different from shadow boxing? Well, shadow boxing is freeform. The footwork is not fixed. The attacks and defensive movements are not fixed. As for drilling take the focus pads for a moment. Lets say you want to work on and isolate your jab. Now you can do this in kata. Or you can work on the pad. Jabbing for it as it moves at different speeds and angles. Learning how to adjust it as necessary to hit your target. At the end of the training who is going to have a better jab? The guy practicing against no resistance, aiming at the same imaginary target or the guy who has resistance in his training? The guy who works to land his jabs will essentially have a better jab. This carries over for all techniques.

As for changing angles in kata, you dont see it much. Why would you when you've been given one "correct" way to do the kata? Now the angle may change due to the footwork changing. However, thats not the same as the technique itself being adjusted.
Posted by: oldman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:17 PM

Chen,
If you take on the task of detroying the myth would it be fair for me to first ask you what the myth is?
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:19 PM

Chen,
What is your experience with kata? Have you had kata training at all? What kata do you know?

Yeah..what is the myth?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:22 PM

The poor instruction is the biggest flaw. Its also the reason many have a poor understanding of it. Which is why it think its better training to approach it scientifically.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:31 PM

The question is what can studying kata do for you. I personally get alot out of kata training.
Contrary to popular belief and the way it is taught alot of times,kata is not meant to be used against specific attacks. Kata shows you pressure points,how the body works,where and how to hit,and how to use your own body effectively. How will all of these things not help your karate?
Kata is not like other training,it takes time and if you are not willing to put the time in and explore then just don't do kata,it's simple really.
Posted by: oldman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:37 PM

Quote:

The poor instruction is the biggest flaw.




Bigger than a person wanting to learn to fight?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:41 PM

I was hoping you would reply Brian. Sure your kata may have taught you those things but if you could learn them faster than you did, wouldnt you? I believe with Bagwork, sparring, and drilling you can do this. I wont go so far as to call kata useless. Thats not my purpose, instead, I will say that its an outdated approach. Nearly every aspect of Martial arts has changed over the past 30 years or so. The physical training, sparring and approach to self defense has changed greatly, especially with the induction of UFC and K1. The only thing that hasnt changed is kata and I believe its way past due.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:46 PM

Quote:

I was hoping you would reply Brian. Sure your kata may have taught you those things but if you could learn them faster than you did, wouldnt you? I believe with Bagwork, sparring, and drilling you can do this. I wont go so far as to call kata useless. Thats not my purpose, instead, I will say that its an outdated approach. Nearly every aspect of Martial arts has changed over the past 30 years or so. The physical training, sparring and approach to self defense has changed greatly, especially with the induction of UFC and K1. The only thing that hasnt changed is kata and I believe its way past due.




So let me get this straight. You think kata training is outdated because of the ufc and k1?
The purpose of kata is not to go do a cage fight,lol,there's a big difference between squaring off to fight and self defense.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:49 PM

Quote:

Sure your kata may have taught you those things but if you could learn them faster than you did, wouldnt you?




Absolutely not. If all I wanted was to compete then yes,but kata helps with retension as well as giving you a strong foundation for learning well into the oldman years.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:50 PM

Chen

Ok, but here you bring up a couple of false premises.

1-That UFC and K-1 have changed things.

See that arguement depends on OTHER PEOPLES fighting abilty.

In effect your saying, Tito Ortiz is a tough guy (which his is) "I" train just like Tito--so 'I" am a tough guy as well.

And that may not be the case at all.

In effect your pointing to SOMEBODYelses skills as "proof" of your own.

I maintain that martial arts are nearly utterly PERSONALLY dependent.

That the "founder" was stone killer or that you train "just like Chuck Liddell may be 100 percent correct--but that matters little unles those guys are WITH you when it goes down.

All that matters is what YOU personally can do.

2- The idea that SD or fighting has somehow chanegd.

A punch is a punch, a kick is kick and a lock is a lock---lots of varitaion on a theme--but "new?"

Not really.

The only thing that has "really" changed is the ready avaliablity of firearms---which has rendered almost ALL forms of un-armed SD obselete.

I also disagree with your shadowboxing and "free form" example---in shadowboxing you ARE free to throw whatever techniques you wish HOWEVER--a uppercut is still an uppercut and MUST be thrown "properly."

A kata, at base is just a long chain of various punchs, kicks and blocks linked togather for the purpose of practice.

A bit more formal in arrangement than shadowboxing--but not all that removed from it either.
Posted by: Spade

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:57 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Repetition is a huge part of any art. You gotta practice right? My thoughts are that kata arent neccessarily the fastest or best way to learn this.

You said "While SPARRING Ive developed the muscle memory..." Ah, but sparring is far from kata. And I believe that sparring is where the majority of the focus should be. And drilling. Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack. You have one place to go in kata to be performed "correctly" but in all reality, there are multiple angles for all techniques that can be considered "correct"





what I meant was "While I am sparring, I still have the muscle memory from doing kata" My mistake.


As far as the focus of training being on sparring, I once thought that too, however I realized that if you spar without having worked on technique, you will get sloppy, and have sloppy technique.

"Drilling and shadow boxing to learn the proper mechanics then sparring to fine tune them and learning how to get them to work for you. Kata doesnt teach you to adjust your techniques to suit different angles of the opponents attack."

How is kata any different from shadow boxing? or doing a drill, I'm assuming, on a bag/pad?

Also, in my katas we change angles quite often, and do blocks/attacks from different angles all the time, its a very big part of the majority of my katas.




Yes if you spar without drilling, bag work or shadow boxing then your sparring will be sloppy. However, those tools are used. And used to replace Kata.

How is kata different from shadow boxing? Well, shadow boxing is freeform. The footwork is not fixed. The attacks and defensive movements are not fixed. As for drilling take the focus pads for a moment. Lets say you want to work on and isolate your jab. Now you can do this in kata. Or you can work on the pad. Jabbing for it as it moves at different speeds and angles. Learning how to adjust it as necessary to hit your target. At the end of the training who is going to have a better jab? The guy practicing against no resistance, aiming at the same imaginary target or the guy who has resistance in his training? The guy who works to land his jabs will essentially have a better jab. This carries over for all techniques.

As for changing angles in kata, you dont see it much. Why would you when you've been given one "correct" way to do the kata? Now the angle may change due to the footwork changing. However, thats not the same as the technique itself being adjusted.




If you do more jabs than me on a day to day bases, your jabs will improve faster than mine.

Kata isn't about isloating one technique, we have charts for that. Kata is about stringing a wide range of techniques together, enabling you to flow better, improving all of the techinques in the kata, by doing the kata.

If you do kata with some effort, putting power and speed into each movement, its just as good as hitting a focus mit.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 04:59 PM

The myth is that they are required training regiment for successful self defense. Sorry about not being clear about that.

Lots of replies at once. First, I dont think that katas are inferior because of UFC or K1. Im not so shallow. My view is based on my experience with forms and kata, and ascientific approach to fighting. I did forms for some years while studying Moo Duk Kwan TKD. To be honest with you, learning foriegn language and cultural history arent on my list of priorities and Ive quit that type of training so long ago that I couldnt tell you the names of the forms themselves. However, I practiced all of my forms, in order, daily for about two years. I could probably still perform them. Its the things Ive done after those two years, in the past 6 years or so, that have formed my opinions.

And Brian, why not get better faster?
If you train to be better at your art why not do it quickly? If the results are good performance then I dont see a disadvantage to this. Its not just about competition but self defense as well.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:03 PM

Gotta disagree. Doing kata with power and speed is nothing like doing focus pads. Focus pads move, for one. Forcing you to perform while constantly adjusting. Just like you would be forced to adjust to your opponent.

And yes, If I do more jabs, Im better at it. Which is perfect for drilling. And drilling doesnt have to be just one technique. You can do drilling for combos, footwork, takedowns and grappling. Just for clarification. Also you can learn timing with progressive resistance sparring and good bagwork.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:07 PM

I disagree with alot of statements spade has made. I'm not sure what his level of experience is,but kata is not meant to replace hitting real objects.
Why not get better faster? Better at what? Fighting? Yes,but in the long run your self defense is better through the kata then without it. there are many techniques learned and retained better because of kata.
In my opinion kata has a bad rap given to it by instructors teaching sport versions of it. Everything is a friggin block to them.
Posted by: student_of_life

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:09 PM

jkd guys have prefered combos, boxers have fav combos, tkd guys ave prefered combos, and all the way back, choki motobu had prefered combos. kata can be broken down into small sequences if yo want, and ever some small movements added to accomidate a spefic response or action.

all in all a kata is essentially the same a shodowboxing routine, except! its a constant, in a way a small fight that can be analyzed to disect out of it the dynamics of body motion as they relate to fighting.

you don't think kata is an effective training tool and i don't like my nana's pastery, who really cares?

more analagies!!! you got it!!!

you don't like the way tkd guys look at self defence, go train krave maga maby??

you don't like rice?? go to mcdonalds!!

and im sure brian and oldman will agree...
you don't like kata? get the hell out of a traditional dojo!!

i bet your happy training where you do, great, but theres a lot of us out here who beleive in kata, so were ready and willing to answer any questions concerning its pratice and purpose, so would someone finially ask one? instead of givimg me your training schedual??
Posted by: oldman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:10 PM

Would it surprise anyone if I said that it is my belief that a person walking in the door of a dojo or a gym generally has no idea what they want or need to learn. Would it surprise anyone if I said that a person walking into a dojo or a gym asking to learn to fight is deluded, confused or lacks understanding. I don't mean that in a bad way. Just a human way. It's not "mystical" its' scientific.

Lets use Mazlow's hierarchy of needs as the base for the arguement. A person "needing" to defend himself and looking for the most efficent means to do that would most efficiently do it by arming himself.Training Karate or MMA would be inefficiant compared to arming oneself. After meeting our rudimentary needs for shelter and safety a normal human moves up the hierarchy and attempts to meets "Higher needs". Identity, belonging, community, purpose. Thet majority of people walking into a gym or dojo have there lower level needs well taken care of long before they darken the door of a training facility.

So if that is true the question becomes in what ways does TMA, MMA or JKD or any method of training aid people in meeting their actual and percieved needs In a way that say... knitting with friends doesn't.

Quote:

The myth is that they are required training regiment for successful self defense.




To be honest I have never heard anyone take that position.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:15 PM

Ah but things have changed in the world of MA. For one awareness. With the internet came the ability to learn almost anything. Training has changed quiet a bit. How many full contact sparring was there 30 years ago when karate was still relatively new to the u.s.? Not a whole lot. The awareness of all fighting ranges in combat. Many schools used to be one dimensional. Now many of them incorporate bjj or other arts to supplement their core training. So in affect UFC and K1, and the MMA scene changed things quit a bit. Maybe not directly but through the awareness it caused. And no Im not saying that because I train like them that I fight as well or worse than they do. It is a personal thing like you said.

As for shadow boxing being freeform. yes it is. The uppercut, while being properly executed is not restricted to one plane of movement such as in kata.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:16 PM

I HAVE heard that kata is necessary for the complete development of fighting skill. I have heard that kata is NOT necessary for the complete development of fighting skill. Both of statements have come from instructors who teach kata as a part of their curriculum.

I (of course) take the stance that kata is not a necessary practice, but to each his own. That it isn't necessary should be fairly obvious. I don't really care either way honestly, I just like good conversation -- which is what the whole kata thing is about for me.

Cheers,


-John
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen eats cake and cactus - 10/11/06 05:22 PM

I have heard that kata is necessary for self defense,but it's simply not true and any mma guy can prove it.
Posted by: student_of_life

Re: Chen eats cake and cactus - 10/11/06 05:28 PM

so your saying that every thing we can learn from kata has already been improved uppon through modern methods??

you think that this argument realy bothers the kendo guys much at all? bottom line is yeah, it's personal, and this person enjoys his training, you newfangled kids with all you elctronic training equpiment and videogames can go to town, i'll just keep on punching the old peice of wood in the back yard......lonly old me.......
Posted by: Spade

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:30 PM

Quote:

Gotta disagree. Doing kata with power and speed is nothing like doing focus pads. Focus pads move, for one. Forcing you to perform while constantly adjusting. Just like you would be forced to adjust to your opponent.

And yes, If I do more jabs, Im better at it. Which is perfect for drilling. And drilling doesnt have to be just one technique. You can do drilling for combos, footwork, takedowns and grappling. Just for clarification. Also you can learn timing with progressive resistance sparring and good bagwork.




I'd also like to note that I do bag work, I use focus pads, I do the drills and the sparring etc...

You can also use kata for combos, footwork, takedowns, grabbling.

I understand what you mean when you want to go against moving focus mits, I agree that kata won't help you time your opponets movements.

However thats where sparring comes in.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen eats cake and cactus - 10/11/06 05:31 PM

There are different methods to learning everything in kata,it's just how you want to go about it. I prefer kata.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:40 PM

Spade wrote
Quote:

I understand what you mean when you want to go against moving focus mits, I agree that kata won't help you time your opponets movements.

However thats where sparring comes in.





So why not simply do more sparring while supplementing time on focus pads? Sparring IS the thing that develops the attributes for fighting anyway!



-John
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:41 PM

Chen

30 years ago most sparring was full contact or nearly so--groin kicking was still legal in some areas.
That was still back in the block or bleed days.
In Japan, fighters were often injured in tournament sparring.

(the Kyoshinkai, the Uechi and the Goju groups to my info, have pretty much always gone hard)

Many schools practice a much harsher form of sparring "in horse" than they do at tournament--esp "open" ones.

Awarmenss of fighting ranges is a really old concept that is in no way shape or form "new."

Only poor schools are "one dimensional"---so their training is suspect from the get-go.

Still don't see shadowboxing as all that differentfrom kata.

I'm still "stuck" with the same set of possible punchs, same set of movement etc.
Not like I can suddenly throw a kick into the mix---I mean I CAN--just my coach will kill me.

I am picking up an uppercut and jab in various kata, so I can either practice them IN the kata.
Or I can pull them out and practice them on the heavy bag, or with a resistant partner.

Just like I can with shadowboxing.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:45 PM

CXT --

Do you really see no difference between shadow boxing and kata? Does shadow boxing have to stay rooted to some pattern on the floor or, aren't you allowed to move around and improvise?

Isn't kata something that as a pattern is pretty much "fixed" as in, the pattern is already pre-arranged? That certainly isn't the case with shadow boxing.


-John
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Chen eats cake and cactus - 10/11/06 05:47 PM

OK so I came over to have a looksey,

according to Chen -

'The myth is that they (kata) are required training regiment for successful self defense.'

I agree that the majority of 'traditional' karateka believe this to be true, I do not however.

Kata to me is simply the method that the old art of karate is passed to us, within it is a lifetimes worth of study if one wants that knowledge and ultimatly respect the culture/art the kata came from.

By just 'doing' kata one doesn't learn much. By understnading/experiencing the principles of the kata and applying them in our training realistically, one improves for self defence and many other things, they are the tombs of knowledge from the ancients for us all !!!!!!

And as stated they form part of a balanced workout,over a long period of time (even when we are very old).

Now go practise your kata JKD dogs!
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:47 PM

JKogas

I disagree, in part-- unless of course, your constantly, consistanly, sparring new people.

Otherwise is just more of the same old guys banging heads.

How long does it take to figure out that "frank has a weak ground game" or that "Bob has a weak left."

Sparring requires rules---do too much of it and you get used to the rules and often don't re-act fast enough when the rules change.

Speaking personally ONLY here. I frequently spar with other folks from different styles--and we ALL fight "best" under the rules we most often fight under.

Speaking just for me, you have to be carful with your sparring.

In answer to your question.

Yes, I see "a" difference, just not much of one.

I go to a boxing gym, I am NOT allowed to throw kicks and sweeps and elbow strikes, I am not allowed to use "funny" footwork, I am not allowed to head-but, or practice throwing punchs to the groin.

I can ONLY throw the punchs and use the footwork I have been taught.

I am free to make up my own routine--just can't practiece them when the coach is watching.

Sure there is a difference--I just don't see it as all that much of one.

An upper cut or a jab is the same in a kata or when I'm shadowboxing, or when I'm working the bags.

Then again, I ALSO don't see a kata as being all that "fixed" either.

That is not how they were practiced back in the day----the "fixed" nature is more a modern thing.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:55 PM

Quote by cxt -

Quote:

I disagree, in part-- unless of course, your constantly, consistanly, sparring new people.

Otherwise is just more of the same old guys banging heads.

How long does it take to figure out that "frank has a weak ground game" or that "Bob has a weak left."




This is a valid point, IMHO. Either the people or the rules of the particular session should be changed often for best effect.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 05:57 PM

CXT wrote
Quote:

JKogas

I disagree, in part-- unless of course, your constantly, consistanly, sparring new people.

Otherwise is just more of the same old guys banging heads.

How long does it take to figure out that "frank has a weak ground game" or that "Bob has a weak left."





It doesn’t take very long to start to hone on a guys game if you’re constantly sparring the same person. I'd say that if that's all you're doing, you're limiting yourself in the TYPE of sparring that you're doing.

Sparring can take many forms, including isolation sparring. Perhaps “Frank” here DOES have a weak ground game. If all we did was spar from the takedown to the finish, he would likely never improve.

We CAN however isolate his weakness and work on that with progressive resistance and variable intensity. He WILL improve to the limit that he is physically capable of. And quite frankly, he will do so MUCH faster than if I devised some sort of kata for him to do – not that that was what you were implying.

What *I* am implying is that there always needs to be some sort of resistance, even if it is progressive and graduated. A pattern isn’t going to help him come along any faster. Without that resistance, it will probably take him even longer to develop any applicable skill.

Part of the confusion comes from the various definitions of what sparring means. It isn’t always random action from the opening bell to the ending bell. There can be a method to the madness if you will.


Quote:


Sparring requires rules---do too much of it and you get used to the rules and often don't re-act fast enough when the rules change.





What DOESN’T require rules though?

However, rules in what way? I mean, I can SPAR groin shots and eye shots just as realistically as someone can in a drill – which is to say, not very realistically. If you’re meaning that you are practicing them against an IMAGINARY opponent, then I would say that’s even less realistic. In my opinion.

Quote:



Speaking personally ONLY here. I frequently spar with other folks from different styles--and we ALL fight "best" under the rules we most often fight under.

Speaking just for me, you have to be carfeul with your sparring.





I would say that you’d have to be even MORE careful when you are sparring the “air” lest one might begin to think that he can actually apply his “game” against something that moves and fights back.



-John
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:03 PM

MattJ

Agreed!

One of the explinations for kata that I have heard is kinda along the same lines.

You follow a fixed pattern in kata, precisely because people are trying to get you out of your "comfort zone" of personal favorite techniqes and methods of moving etc, and to work with new techniques and methods.

You may find that it sucks--or you may find something new you can use---but you would find out little if you kept doing things the "same" old way.

Kinda like a good boxing coach will work with a "righty" to develop skills with the left.

Develop specifc drills and practice sessions to gain greater agilty with the "off" hand.

Stuff you probably would not do if left to your own devices.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:09 PM

Jkogas

Then I would say that "kata" has about as many different definations and viewpoints as does "sparring."

Means different things to different folks.

If you think you can sparr with eye shots and groin strikes just as "realistically" as you can on a heavy bag et al--remind me NEVER to do any "friendly" sparring with you.

How is a jab or an uppercut different in shadowboxing than it is in kata?

Only substantive difference is context---not application.
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:15 PM

'What *I* am implying is that there always needs to be some sort of resistance'

so why shadow box?

Im not trying to base any significant argument on that point but just wanted to understand why boxers and JKD (I think) does alot of that, theres no resistance?
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:16 PM

Here is part II from the previous post that I wanted to address...

CXT wrote
Quote:


In answer to your question.

Yes, I see "a" difference, just not much of one.

I go to a boxing gym, I am NOT allowed to throw kicks and sweeps and elbow strikes, I am not allowed to use "funny" footwork, I am not allowed to head-but, or practice throwing punchs to the groin.





You could perhaps do those things in an MMA gym where “boxing” was practiced. As far as the punches to the groin go, you can spar that with whomever you are able to get as a willing partner. Which isn’t always an awful lot of folks.


Quote:


I can ONLY throw the punchs and use the footwork I have been taught.

I am free to make up my own routine--just can't practiece them when the coach is watching.

Sure there is a difference--I just don't see it as all that much of one.





I’d believe that shadow boxing can be to whatever targets you desire – if we’re still talking about shadow boxing. I don’t see any problem there. I see the difference between the patterns being fixed or not as a fairly big one.


Quote:

An upper cut or a jab is the same in a kata or when I'm shadowboxing, or when I'm working the bags.

Then again, I ALSO don't see a kata as being all that "fixed" either.





I suppose that is where we differ. I see kata as very fixed and pre-arranged. Otherwise you’d not have all of the various kata that exist, right? I mean, how many different “patterns” are there that exist?

Some say that one style has 11. Another states that there are 26 different forms in yet another style.

That alone would tell you that they are fixed or you’d need only ONE, right? There is really only one shadow boxing form and, it’s open to improvisation – thus eliminating the need for multiple forms.



Quote:


That is not how they were practiced back in the day----the "fixed" nature is more a modern thing.





Too bad we can then go “back in the day”. I suppose that would be great if that were the case NOW. Unfortunately, now is what we’re dealing with.

Quote:

Jkogas

If you think you can sparr with eye shots and groin strikes just as "realistically" as you can on a heavy bag et al--remind me NEVER to do any "friendly" sparring with you.





I’m sorry, I wasn’t referring to heavy bag practice. Trust me, I’m not sparring full contact groin fighting, lol



Quote:


How is a jab or an uppercut different in shadowboxing than it is in kata?

Only substantive difference is context---not application.





I’d say there IS no difference. Most of the differences I’ve seen are in regard to footwork.



-John
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:22 PM

Quote:

'What *I* am implying is that there always needs to be some sort of resistance'

so why shadow box?





Again, I don't see shadow boxing and kata as the 'same thing'. I believe that's already been stated by me at least 2,337 times.


Quote:

Im not trying to base any significant argument on that point but just wanted to understand why boxers and JKD (I think) does alot of that, theres no resistance?





Its part of a warm up for one thing. Its a way to perfect moving form and alive footwork that doesn't exist along a fixed pattern.

And personally, we don't do a great deal of it. It's something that I don't have anyone doing in the gym but primarily on their own time when they don't have access to partners.

Time is of the essense. People pay me for technical training -- not something that they can do on their own time, like calisthenics for example.



-John
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:31 PM

OK I see, fair enough.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 06:32 PM

JKogas

But NOT in a boxing gym and were talking about shadowboxing.

Either way--if you making up youown routine for your own specific purpose--then that is not all that different from doing a kata for the same reason---just a bit more organized.

They differ mainly in extent---the CONCEPT is largely the same.

If I'm teaching a guy to throw combinations of 2 quick lead left jabs and quick kick to the knee then that differs little from a a kata.

A kata is little more, at base, than multiple sets of combinations linked togather for practice purpose.

You can do them in the air, on a heavy bag, with a partner--whatever you have at the time.

If I'm teaching someone how to "reverse" out of specifc locks or holds--then I'm practicing a "fixed" set of skills.
Say were working on a specifc version of a leg lock.
Other than the resistance--which you should be doing--how is repeating the same set of movements over and over and over THERE different from doing the same set of movements in a kata????

Its no less "fixed."
As far as "fixed" goes, kinda depends on what level and whom your dealing with.

"My" Seisan kata is nothing like my buddies--same tecniques in that we are both working kicks, punchs, knee strikes, eye strikes etc.
But they are done to vastly different rhythem, timing, targets, angles, power etc.

What he sees as a parry and eyestrike-I see as a trap and lock.

At lower level, people look much the same, as they gain skills they develop their own appraoch.
Just like they do in pretty mcuh any sport.

I would say that differnt forms teach dfferent skills--an upper cut is found in one, a jab in another.

No different than a coach deciding to help a guy work any specifc skill.

Not sure that I agree, there are as many shadowboxing forms as their are people.

In a sense, shadowboxing is just a "short lived" informal kata that is "supposed" to be PART of trainign regimen of sparring, bagwork, drills, strength training, resistive partner drills etc---just like the "traditional" arts are supposed to be doing.

I can't be responsible for poor teaching on bad schools.

I can only be responsible for me and my own training.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 07:49 PM

how much experience do you have with a kata-centric Art and with which teachers ?
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 07:55 PM

Quote:

I did forms for some years while studying Moo Duk Kwan TKD. To be honest with you, learning foriegn language and cultural history arent on my list of priorities and Ive quit that type of training so long ago that I couldnt tell you the names of the forms themselves. However, I practiced all of my forms, in order, daily for about two years. I could probably still perform them. Its the things Ive done after those two years, in the past 6 years or so, that have formed my opinions.




I take it he had two years of experience with "forms". Herein lies the big problem.

I think when the katas/forms were used for competetion purposes the whole original intent went straight to hades.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 08:38 PM

it figures. he went to a mcdojo thinking he was gonna learn how to fight and defend himself, then when he realized it was chucky cheese, he finds a boxing club with Bruce Lee's name - and now he's all anti-kata. lol

In one generation, the JKD that bruce was trying to create has turned into market-driven MMA training.

one more generation (if not already), it'll have lil-dwagon bwack bewlts, just like all the other over-commercial MA.

if you want to say kata sucks...at least come from something other than a mcdojo background in it.

If I said "JKD sucks" after taking it for 2 years from some clown that self-promoted himself after studying BL movies...my evaluation of JKD would 'be like water'.

how d'ya like THAT? Mr. Chen?
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 09:34 PM

You know, the basic problem DOES come from inadequate instruction. Thats pretty much always going to be the case.

That said, it seems like inadequate instruction is the rule and not the exception.

When I walk into a karate school to watch training, I see what is in my opinion, garbage for 90 percent of class time. If there is ANY time left over for sparring, it's usually a game of tag.

Can anyone fault me for having a bad opinion for the lion's share of traditional martial arts training? It's pretty bad when good training is the exception to the rule.


-John
Posted by: Ronin1966

Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 09:42 PM

Hello Chen Zen:

I'm not sure i was ever one of those ~invited~ but with permission, I'll offer my thoughts whatever they might be worth (or not).

I will say up front I have absolutely no "need" to ~defend~ my position on kata, as I know them to be of tremendous value. Others can feel differently, and some passionately so, but that changes nothing to the value I know them to possess.



Lets go down your list and see where (if anywhere) we/others get with it.... ? If repetition were the sole usage, I do not know that would be a bad thing.

Whatever the technique or small sequences of a series... to effectively do them, we must engrain them. A partner is not always/typically available. Kata is not the END of the process merely an excellent tool. Again and again, so that the action & mechanics are instinctual.

Then you explore the engrained response with a partner and return to hone some more.

<<There is too much interpretation for the student.

Ummmmngh, not sure of all the implications of this one. My basic gist would be that to teach someone anything, you don'tgive them the highest knowledge available and then wave bye-bye. You start with the fundamental stuff, and carefully, slowly add more information once they have absorbed a certain level of the previous.

I would have gone insane if on my first day I was exploring the subtle things which I'm exploring now. I would neither have an appreciation of the nuances, the whispers, the hints nor the ability to understand them well. I start at the gross and slowly whittle away the flourishes, and unnecessary exxagerations, I misunderstood/misperceived earlier.

I propose they come in layers usually for a reason...

<<Self defense should be taught in a more direct manner

Do you contend all of your students require your knowledge for those exclusive reasons? What do they do for their lifestyle or as a job that assault, daily is likely, and the knowledge necessary retroactively?

Even trained, it requires a some amount of time to have skill.

<<intelligent discussion on the issue.

That lets me out

Jeff
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 09:43 PM

Very sad and true John. I like ti mix it up,I like to do groundwork,and I also enjoy practicing and studying kata,go figure..
Posted by: Spade

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 10:25 PM

This has been a good debate, I got to learn a lot from both sides.

When I first started seriously trainning in my katas I improved greatly, I have a great instructor who stresses the use of kata and always pulls bunki from our katas.

I have also had instructors who didn't stress katas, or pull bunki from them. Obviously if I had started out with either of these instructors, I would have looked down on the use of kata for trainning as well.

Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 10:26 PM

Well, Ed glad to hear that you know my previous school and that it was garbage! Always one guy to take an itelligent conversation personally. The truth of the matter is, that tkd school wasnt the first i had joined and was far from a Mcdojo. Even though they practiced forms. Not to mention the "Self defense" Class run by the school didnt deal with a single kata. Go figure huh?

Cxt, I think a punch within kata and a punch delivered shadow boxing are worlds apart. Like you said coach will yell if you improv. As for me, I wouldnt mind being able to throw a jab at any angle instead of simply straight.
Posted by: Spade

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 10:41 PM

Quote:

Well, Ed glad to hear that you know my previous school and that it was garbage! Always one guy to take an itelligent conversation personally. The truth of the matter is, that tkd school wasnt the first i had joined and was far from a Mcdojo. Even though they practiced forms. Not to mention the "Self defense" Class run by the school didnt deal with a single kata. Go figure huh?

Cxt, I think a punch within kata and a punch delivered shadow boxing are worlds apart. Like you said coach will yell if you improv. As for me, I wouldnt mind being able to throw a jab at any angle instead of simply straight.





Forms are different then katas.

A form is doing "Low block, low punch" then turnning and doing the same thing over and over again.

Where a kata is more diverse.

At least that has been my understanding from doing "Forms" and "Katas"


""Self defense" Class run by the school didnt deal with a single kata. Go figure huh?"


That just makes it harder on the students, my Isshinryu instructor takes our kata and and uses it to show us our self defense movements.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/11/06 11:14 PM

I didn't take anything personal, just spicing up conversation.

JK: I agree. I'd put the percentages at 80% false advertising kata as self-defense but at most half-decent cardio exercise. 10% crap. and 5% trying hard not to be crap. the other 5% you won't find at the mall.

but is that the flaw of kata? no. like you said, it's the flaw of how it's taught/misunderstood.

your only arguments are in guestimate statistics and statements such as 'most places train kata like crap'...and I'd agree with you. that makes the training crap. doesn't make the kata crap.

and whats the big deal anyway? kata is a teaching tool.

remember in Rocky when the old-timer coach bounds up Balboa's favored arm so he can learn how to punch with his other? same conceptual thing. if taught right, kata is about good habits. if taught wrong, it's about learning bad habits or no habits at all.


so what myth are we destroying here? the one that says 'kata sucks' ?
Posted by: ANDY44

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 03:00 AM

The question you posted on the karate forum was
Are you braindamaged?!


I dont take offence to such remarks however




These are my thougths and suggestions. If you would like to follow them then fine if not that is fine.
Heian shodan found as a Kata in KARATE seems to me to have certain attacks and the the defences to counter the attacks all in one kata.

Some of the defences could be used as actually strikes to damage the limbs being used by an attacker as well as blocks then counter attacks to the torso/ head.

The problem I have found with the blocks then counter attacks to the head/ torso is that it leaves the defender open to counter attack where as the strikes to the limbs if done a specific way doesn’t. More hit and move tactics.
In comparison to a specific technique done in modern MMA's UFC to disable a certain limb I find the method available in Heian shodan isn’t open to direct counter attack and can be equaly effective. Given this technique is in a so called basic kata it would seem your critiscism of kata is unjust and unfounded.

Kata practice might there fore be required for any practicing karate ka or martial artist wishing to find technique that will work. If you wish for me to explain the said technique then no chance. what I would suggest you do is

Look
One. for a technique used in MMA's UFC that disables a limb by striking.
Two. study Heian shodan and all its applications including and see if a comparitive technique can be found.
When the technique is found then;
Three. practice the technique on a pad bag etc
Four. Find a partner and practice the techniques in different situations angles etc.
Find a MMA venue and use it

Thanks Andy

Just a small friendly foot note
If you cant be bothered to try what I sugested then you realy have very little right to critiscise Kata in any martial art. Applications perhaps but not the actual kata.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 08:38 AM

Spade,
Kata and forms are the same thing.

Chen,
That's the mistake alot of kata based schools make. Self deense is seperated from the kata. The kata should be the foundation for the self defense. There are a multitude of techniques to work on just in the basic kata like the taikyoku series. The first is basically a low block kata in an H pattern,lots of schools teach this in one way or another. Then the square off for one step sparring where one guy steps in with a long punch or kick and you are supposed to block it,that's a loada crapola. It's the instructors fault for trying to teach what he doesn't really know.
Throwing a jab shadowboxing and in kata are two different things.The kata shows you where and how to hit as well as what to do before and after which can be adapted to many different situations.Learn that in boxing class?
I don't think TMA schools need to change their kata,just the way they train it.Another thing they need to change is sparring and physical fitness in my opinion.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:56 AM

JKogas

I certainly wouldn't fault you-----there are a ton of crappy schools out there.

But I can't be responsible for them, I can only be responsible for me.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 11:31 AM

CXT wrote
Quote:

JKogas

I certainly wouldn't fault you-----there are a ton of crappy schools out there.

But I can't be responsible for them, I can only be responsible for me.





Call me John.

Trust me, I understand that completely. But it's not *you* that I'm referring to when I speak at random regarding my experiences and observations – because that’s all I can truthfully speak about, not knowing you personally. And I wish I DID know you better. I’d love to see and experience what it is that you do.


To everyone else


This or any other debate on an internet forum is going to be limited because no one can actually see or experience first hand, each side of the argument. We sit back and sling words at each other, perhaps throwing in a “Youtube” video in the process. Its little wonder these debates rage on as they do because no ground is ever gained on either side. Truthfully, no ground NEEDS to be gained. But all opinions should be heard so as to let each individual take what’s out there (regarding information) and make his or her OWN mind up.

As CXT said, “I can only be responsible for me”. That’s true for us all.



-John
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 12:14 PM

It's nothing special but im happy to post some very simple kata work that we do at my dojo,

http://www.putfile.com/shoshinkan


I hope it illistrates a functional self defense led way of training kata, it certianly seems to upset
'traditionalists' and please people looking for a bit of reality.

I am sorting out a video to show it trained 'real time' under pressure and shall post that soon.
Posted by: butterfly

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 12:42 PM

Jim,

I am not even sure if it is a question of usable technique being presented. I think that this should be noted first. All things have good in them and utility isn't in the derivation, but in the practice. I will preface however, and say my exposure to traditional/classical kata and it's extracted principles are fairly low.

What I have seen though, it is less the conceptual viability in the extraction of ideas or principles, but in the training of them. Just as a point of reference from a karate background, one can do the kihon stuff and practice archetypal stances for strengthing etc...I have no problem with it. However, in a defensive punching practice where you are learning to slip a punch or parry one and deliver a counter, I often see someone being presented in their front stance with reverse punch chambered at the hip or high on the chest and then delivering a punch with a loud yell as the defender blocks and moves...but acknowledging all the time that the attacker's punch is going to stop an inch or two from the defender's sternum.

This is the defense against a punch practice which has severe short comings and I link the same problems to kata: 1) No contact, means no penalty for wrong technique; 2) Distance and timing are now off since impact zone is back several inches from where it should be and this also means the block/parry is done at the wrong instance; 3) No one is going to encounter someone somewhere who will punch them in a front karate stance and yell as they are doing it; and 4) This means that if you do this standard practice, you will have defenders who will practice without keeping their chins down, their hands up, and will reinforce this awkward technique that lacks so much similarity to the way a real punch might be offered, that it begs the question of training this way.

That, to me, is the real malediction of this type of rote training which includes kata. That the responses are programmed with muscle memory to reflect improbable use, right out of the box.

I know, everyone says that you extract the usable stuff from kata and play with it. My contention is that if you have the usable stuff and know it...present that and play with it outside the confines of stringent movements that, if I understand ardent kata proponents, are different from how they would apply them. This then means that kata is an additional step that is not necessary and will take up more time than if the defensive movements and their permutations were applied in a more realistic manner against opponents who react differently than the standard format presented.

BTW, I do accept and acknowledge your reasons for study of kata since you said this is historical and cultural to your research. I just think that there are better ways of doing things and even if I give kata its due, it seems to be an extra step, where none now is needed.

-B
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 01:00 PM

understood, I have thought for a good while now that using 'karate' attacks in standard fixed kumite format to be less than usefull for self defense training, as most know I use the common methods of assaut with tempo change, intent and close range application - as best we can anyhow.

I guess my problem is I see all of that as 'kata' training, my textbook of principles is delivered by the kata, as you noted I train in karate and that has historical and cultural links I enjoy, well it does to me anyhow.

Nice post Butterfly and you make some good points.
Posted by: nahate

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 01:35 PM

The kata myth is being reinforced rather than destroyed here, at least the one that misunderstands kata as a mnemonic string of techniques or moves. Kata is in reality not about moves or techniques. It is about movement and technique. It is dynamic, not staccato bursts of unrelated actions.

The misunderstandings about kata are the result of poor instruction by those who never had solid grounding in their art. That is why so much that passes as kata today is best described by T.S. Eliot in his poem The Hollow Men: "Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion."
There may be much moving the limbs around in air, there is little of martial value.

Miyagi Sensei taught beginning students body conditioning and kata solely. No free sparring was attempted until someone had at least ten years training according to one of his students, Toguchi Sensei. Premature and overuse of sporting and so called "realistic" methods is counterproductive and hinders genuine knowledge. If I can bounce around on my toes on the periphery, I don't need to be fighting at all.

Bunkai suffers because people perceive combat to be like sparring. Most of the kata in GojuRyu involve close quarters and serious fighting,seizing and controlling and unbalancing the opponent and ending the confrontation with devastating force against vital areas. There are no tournament championship winning techniques here. And self defense techniques extracted from the kata will be less effective if the practitioner hasn't internalized and metabolized the movement principles crystalized by the kata. You won't learn these skills faster using focus mitts and sparring. You won't even grasp what they are.

A person first trains kata under a good instructor, then the kata trains the person. Anyone with four healthy limbs can kick and punch. Let them start sparring early in their career and they might get better at punching or kicking within that setting, but they've learned nothing from or about genuine karate.


I have heard race horses described as athletes. But if I try to imagine what running is like for a horse, my imagination cannot truly capture four-footed locomotion. Classical karate uses the same familiar bipedal body but in new and unfamilliar ways. The inwardly experienced orientation to martial movement, the instinctive awareness of alignments and force vectors and neuromuscular recruitment developed from kata are alien to anyone lacking the kata experience and cannot be learned from any other source. If kata training hasn't profoundly altered the way you use and experience how your body moves in space then martial arts concepts such as ki, mai, and tae sabaki, will appear esoteric and your understanding and application thereof will be confused and misguided.

Heavy bag work, partner drills, and the rest are important. But kata does not exist to sharpen these ancillary training methods. They are employed to bring life and realism to kata training.

"The secrets of the kata are in the kata." So said Chojun Miyagi. So say those who have trained and been trained by genuine kata.
Posted by: butterfly

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 01:47 PM

Nahate,

Perhaps you're right about my misunderstanding kata. Then again, it has never been proven to me scientifically or otherwise. However, I can see the results of the more modern approach to sports science and medicine.

I will also say that no horse ever won a race by running slowly around a practice field.

-B
Posted by: Neko456

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 01:59 PM

I find all this interesting and see it as different ways to the same end accord to how deep you want to go. I condone Kata training because its a good way to transfer basics thoughts, concepts of a system and ideas that have fighting intention along with other training methods.

What I find contradicting is I've attended Escrima/Kali, Silat, Wing Chung and JKD classes and they all have what I consider Kata or form/dance or a perferred way to do things (Except JKD unless they are teaching the Kali/Silat, its seems to follow more of a boxing concept but do use two man Kata that builds to free form Chi-Soa). Anyway my point is that the Silat and Kali system that JKD is so fond of teach what could be called fighting dance/forms that are in some system thought to be exact appilcations once the dance is taken out.

So what is the different in Okinawan Kata and Kila/Silat dance/forms?? Nothing except one starts with the extreme application and the other is built upon.

As for Shadow boxing if you take all the principles that you know and apply them free form so you respond to the imaginary assault Kata application (not the entire form) could be included in the session. Even to the ground and standing. Kata is not taught free form, though you can train it that, way its puyrpose is to teach system principles and flow, not just fighting.

One of the benifit of Kata is it is knowledge retained.
Have you ever tried to have a old boxer show you his best combination or defensive counter. What you see is a shadow of maybe faded shadow of what was, all that talent and knowledge can all be talked about or even explained maybe, but not repeated, in a manner that it was when he was young. You almost feel like catching them before they fall bc their weak movements are barely recongnizable as boxing more like stumbling. Kata records the techniuques of a great Master or fighters in his prime and past it on for generations to see. Everything is not about fighting in the ring, but with understanding things can come full circle.

I end by pondering, How can one dance be so Deadly and the other Unless? Maybe the answer is in number of Karate dojos vs. the # Kali classes, humm how can we change that. One dance is deadly the other is unless. No they'd never fall for that, but would they??? Dance is Dance isn't it???

While some not all of the old boxers stumble around trying to reproduce their youthful moves. There are old Karate/Kung-fu/Kali/Silat men still doing powerfully and gracefully Katas/forms/or dance. Is Kata unless? I say no why reinvent the wheel? Kata teaches basic, system flow and techniques of once great Masters with or w/o the use of Video or DVD.

Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 02:43 PM

nahate

And with all due respect, your post is a perfect example as to why many people have such a poor opinion of kata.

Its largely important sounding psuedo-scientific near jibberish.

Might "sound" good, but your not actually saying much at all.

How in the name of god (small g) does one get a kata metabolized??????"

More to the point, your simply wrong.

Kata were NEVER supposed to be some sort of stand-alone training method.

Kata were used IN CONJUNCTION with strength training, resistive drills, bag/makiwara, etc.

As Patrick McCarthy observed (my paraphrase) kata were used to practice/rehearse skills already developed by other means.

As has already been established--many times.

Not practicing kata is no more damaging to ones ability to defend ones self than practiceing them are.

It all comes down to the person----always.
Posted by: harlan

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 02:45 PM

(sound of harlan pulling up cozy chair, and grabbing the popcorn... )

Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 02:53 PM

harlan

Hey, what can I say, I'm a "middle of the roader" when it comes to kata.

I see value in it, I see gains from it, and I enjoy its practice.

But other people don't and I would NEVER recommend that people use ANY methods where they don't see gains.

By the same token I don't hold kata in some sort of relgious awe either.

That too is an extreme position---and one not supported by the facts.

Kata is just a tool, one of many.

Just an opinion, and at the end of the day, worth exactly what people paid for it----exactly nothing
Posted by: butterfly

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 03:04 PM

Wow! An ardent fence sitter. Funny!

It's like Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail:
"I fart in your general direction...."

Except in this case, "I pass gas on both sides of the wall, but am still above it..."

-B
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 03:13 PM

I wanted to keep out of this discussion because it didn't seem to be related to my training but clearly it's become muddled by some high terminology, twisted justifications and circular logic which needs to be scrutinised.

Quote:

The kata myth is being reinforced rather than destroyed here, at least the one that misunderstands kata as a mnemonic string of techniques or moves. Kata is in reality not about moves or techniques. It is about movement and technique. It is dynamic, not staccato bursts of unrelated actions.




I'm afraid to agree with you here because I'm about to contradict what you are going to say later. However, I do agree that in principle, kata are developed to be a string of dynamic techniques.

Quote:

The misunderstandings about kata are the result of poor instruction by those who never had solid grounding in their art. That is why so much that passes as kata today is best described by T.S. Eliot in his poem The Hollow Men: "Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion."
There may be much moving the limbs around in air, there is little of martial value.




Actually, kata today are practiced very differently from kata in the old days. Way back when, kata were often simply single techniques, usually practiced between partners. They were similar to sparring in that sense and usually lead to the more dynamic application of those techniques to sparring afterwards. This same technique of using kata to progress to sparring is still used in Koryu Jujutsu today.

Quote:

Miyagi Sensei taught beginning students body conditioning and kata solely. No free sparring was attempted until someone had at least ten years training according to one of his students, Toguchi Sensei.




Miyagi Sensei, despite his reputation, is only one of many Sensei out there. Many other Sensei have used non-kata training to great effect (Jigoro Kano anyone?).

Quote:

Premature and overuse of sporting and so called "realistic" methods is counterproductive and hinders genuine knowledge.




I'm not sure what qualifies this statement. What proof do you have of this apart from someone else's word?

Quote:

If I can bounce around on my toes on the periphery, I don't need to be fighting at all.




What on earth do you mean by this? What does bouncing on toes have to do with fighting?

Quote:

Bunkai suffers because people perceive combat to be like sparring.




Real combat suffers from being unpredictable, unlike kata, which is very predictable. You can't learn how to deal with the unpredictable by training with the predictable.

Quote:

Most of the kata in GojuRyu involve close quarters and serious fighting,seizing and controlling and unbalancing the opponent and ending the confrontation with devastating force against vital areas.




Most of my sparring involves such techniques too (although I don't do the techniques full force of course, then again nor do you if you are only hitting air with them). If you're training sparring in any other way, you're doing it wrong.

Quote:

There are no tournament championship winning
techniques here.




Clearly, punches and kicks are not part of your kata.

Quote:

And self defense techniques extracted from the kata will be less effective if the practitioner hasn't internalized and metabolized the movement principles crystalized by the kata.




This I again reluctantly agree with. If you don't understand your kata, bunkai is all but useless. However, this doesn't affect the effectiveness of your sparring training for self defense.

Quote:

You won't learn these skills faster using focus mitts and sparring. You won't even grasp what they are.




I think I can grasp what a punch and a kick is after doing them 10000 times against a heavy bag. If you can't manage that, you've got some problems with how you're hitting that bag. If you can't understand how to use a technique against someone after using it in sparring, you've got little hope of knowing how to apply it against someone by any other means.

Quote:

A person first trains kata under a good instructor, then the kata trains the person. Anyone with four healthy limbs can kick and punch. Let them start sparring early in their career and they might get better at punching or kicking within that setting, but they've learned nothing from or about genuine karate.




This is what it all boils down to, "genuine karate", isn't it? If "genuine karate" isn't at least partly about "getting better at punching or kicking" within the setting of someone trying to punch and kick you and trying to stop you from punching and kicking them, then what is it about? I thought karate was a martial art and you're telling me that you've learned nothing from or about "genuine karate" if they've learned punching and kicking?

Quote:

I have heard race horses described as athletes. But if I try to imagine what running is like for a horse, my imagination cannot truly capture four-footed locomotion. Classical karate uses the same familiar bipedal body but in new and unfamilliar ways.




There are only a limited number of ways in which the human body can move. This is why there are so many similarities between martial arts in the world. If you've not trained anything other than Karate though, you would not know this.

Quote:

The inwardly experienced orientation to martial movement, the instinctive awareness of alignments and force vectors and neuromuscular recruitment developed from kata are alien to anyone lacking the kata experience and cannot be learned from any other source.




True, learning kata will teach you how to do kata well. What it won't do is teach you how to fight. In order to learn how to fight, you've got to come as close to fighting as you can, hence sparring.

Quote:

If kata training hasn't profoundly altered the way you use and experience how your body moves in space then martial arts concepts such as ki, mai, and tae sabaki, will appear esoteric and your understanding and application thereof will be confused and misguided.




Actually, you can learn about those through any technique in a martial art. They are not exclusive to kata at all and can be practiced in sparring to good effect.

Quote:

Heavy bag work, partner drills, and the rest are important. But kata does not exist to sharpen these ancillary training methods. They are employed to bring life and realism to kata training.




I believe that these kinds of training have separate goals and are less related than most people think. Bagwork builds muscular strength and develops full punching force against a resisting surface. Partner drills develop response times and accuracy. Sparring develops technical application, strategy and timing. Kata develops spatial awareness, technical control and automated response.

Quote:

"The secrets of the kata are in the kata." So said Chojun Miyagi. So say those who have trained and been trained by genuine kata.




I think you misinterpret this quote, but I'll not shake the foundations of your beliefs by trying to challenge it with my own opinions.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 04:44 PM

Quote:

What on earth do you mean by this? What does bouncing on toes have to do with fighting?



meaning if you only had a fraction of a second to react to an attack...you wouldn't be bouncing on your toes as in sparring.

sparring is ok as long as it's close-in and fast. not the kind of sparring where you have time to use games like stalking each other, faking, false timing, setups, rapid-fire with no power, pulling punches, etc - it can be fun...but it's not working several key aspects, imo.

theres no time for the head-game strategy based sparring if you are working self-defense from the standpoint of: incapacitate your opponent as quickly as possible. causing death or serious injury is inconsequential and safety is not calculated into application. of course safety is a concern for training, but that safety doesn't detract from the principles that are trained.

From what I've read and seen, I'm convinced the Chinese captured the essence of such applications, and forms were made as their capsule. given the right combo of instruction/commitment/dilligence, kata are brutal and deadly....and why wouldn't they be.

do you need kata? no. you don't even need MA...just buy a gun.

this method vs. that method, bla bla bla - find a reality you are comfortable with and enjoy.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 04:52 PM

Ed -

I'm curious to see what you would think is good sparring. Do you have any video?
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 05:34 PM

Quote:

meaning if you only had a fraction of a second to react to an attack...you wouldn't be bouncing on your toes as in sparring.




I'm sorry, bouncing on your toes in sparring? That's a very strange idea to me. I've seen it done in videos and even in some tournaments, but my sparring looks nothing like that.

Quote:

sparring is ok as long as it's close-in and fast. not the kind of sparring where you have time to use games like stalking each other, faking, false timing, setups, rapid-fire with no power, pulling punches, etc - it can be fun...but it's not working several key aspects, imo.




Please tell the guy who knocked me out in sparring that he was pulling his punches. You ASSUME that sport sparring always involves pulling punches. I guarantee you that if you've only encountered sparring which does, you've been to all the wrong sparring tournaments.

Faking, stalking and setups are also very important for self defense, especially when dealing with weapons. If you reveal your intentions to an attacker with a weapon, you're as good as gutted. Faking helps you conceal your intention and the best way to learn how to use such a psychological tactic is in sparring.

Quote:

theres no time for the head-game strategy based sparring if you are working self-defense from the standpoint of: incapacitate your opponent as quickly as possible.




I'm pretty sure that in sparring, when KO is the primary mode of winning, you're learning how to incapacitate an opponent much better than learning by kata, where you imagine you are going to incapacitate an opponent.

Quote:

causing death or serious injury is inconsequential and safety is not calculated into application.




When do you cause death or serious injury in kata? I could say the same things you are saying about sparring in the context of kata training.

Quote:

of course safety is a concern for training, but that safety doesn't detract from the principles that are trained.




Principles such as distancing, timing and reading your opponent are definitely taught by sparring.

Quote:

From what I've read and seen, I'm convinced the Chinese captured the essence of such applications, and forms were made as their capsule. given the right combo of instruction/commitment/dilligence, kata are brutal and deadly....and why wouldn't they be.




I have no doubt that the kata appear to be brutal and deadly, but have you ever seen anyone mauled by a kata? I've seen people badly injured in tournament sparring. I've been concussed myself for the better part of six hours. If that's not "brutal", I don't know what is. Kata is a nice and friendly training method by comparison.

Quote:

do you need kata? no. you don't even need MA...just buy a gun.




Hah, good expression. I'm not arguing against the value of kata. I'm arguing against the supposition that kata does what it doesn't do, which is teach you the dynamics of fighting. It gives you the tools you need to fight and tells you what you need to be aware of your environment but it doesn't tell you how to use those tools or how to gauge their effect on your opponent.

Quote:

this method vs. that method, bla bla bla - find a reality you are comfortable with and enjoy.




Good, I'll stick with my reality which acknowledges both sparring and kata and doesn't go all PC about what is valuable about both.
Posted by: shoshinkan

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 06:03 PM

JKogas said -

'When I walk into a karate school to watch training, I see what is in my opinion, garbage for 90 percent of class time.'

Oh my we absolutly agree on something at last ! LOL
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 07:35 PM

Ed Morris wrote
Quote:


JK: I agree. I'd put the percentages at 80% false advertising kata as self-defense but at most half-decent cardio exercise. 10% crap. and 5% trying hard not to be crap. the other 5% you won't find at the mall.





Agreed.


Quote:


but is that the flaw of kata? no. like you said, it's the flaw of how it's taught/misunderstood.





So no one apparently understands how it’s supposed to be taught. Or those that do are as scarce as hen’s teeth.


Quote:


your only arguments are in guestimate statistics and statements such as 'most places train kata like crap'...and I'd agree with you. that makes the training crap. doesn't make the kata crap.





So everyone is doing it wrong, even if it looks graceful, crisp, fast and the like? What makes one groups kata good and one bad? The fact that a good 75% of class time is spent doing it?



Quote:


and whats the big deal anyway? kata is a teaching tool.





I don’t see a big deal really. Unless you just want to become a better fighter more quickly, then I’d have a big deal with a guy trying to teach me a bunch of kata.


Quote:


remember in Rocky when the old-timer coach bounds up Balboa's favored arm so he can learn how to punch with his other? same conceptual thing. if taught right, kata is about good habits. if taught wrong, it's about learning bad habits or no habits at all.






I don’t see it as the same thing. Rocky wasn’t moving along an “I-pattern on the floor with his bound up arm, stopping every once in a while to yell “kiai”.



-John
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 08:56 PM

Matt,Leo,John: kata and practice based on point-sparring teach 2 separate things. whatever people are into is the best one for them. in my experience, the main differences are range and objective. If you spar very close range and have the objective to take the person down or submit - then I'd say thats better sparring for self-defense. you can train that with either kata or no kata, but you'll have much better odds finding a good non-kata place if thats the range and objective that interests you.

If you spar long-range with the objective of tagging each other...then that sparring is better suited for point-spar practice. that training is abundantly available since the market is driven by competitions that make dallah$. again, you'll have better odds finding a good point-spar place which does not have kata in it's learning curriculum.

whichever floats your boat. when people put a video up, they should mention what the intended range and objective is...thats why I asked first before commenting. my point-sparring is better than my close-range, since I did point-sparring longer - but I later chose to focus on kata study.

does that mean I chose it because kata study is 'better' ? not at all. just a different focus.

I do know one thing though...a poor combination of training is thinking kata study will improve point-sparring skill other than using kata as a cardio exercise.

will 50% kata + 50% resistive training improve your self-defense skill faster than 100% resistive training? I really don't know...or care.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:09 PM

let me know what points everyone agrees/disagrees with ...because I'm starting to lose a handle of where your argument is....other than people just saying over and over that kata sucks.


agree/disagree ?:

If the aim is to be a good fighter in the shortest amount of time, then focusing on an Art that deals with 100% resistance might be the best option. something along the lines of boxing+grappling.

If the aim is to be good at point-sparring (with or without contact) then learn the Art that wins the most competitions.

If the aim is to be good at a well-rounded self-defense in the shortest amount of time, then find a place that specifically deals in that training (with various and improvised weapons/weaponless, situational conditions, ground defense, sitting defense, awareness training, etc).

If the aim is competitions as a demonstration art, then there are a few categories to focus in: sparring, forms and weapons. find what you'd like to compete in, then find a place to train that wins medals in that category.

If the aim is to study what kata contains, then study with someone who knows how to decipher it, how to demonstrate it, and how to teach it. it's not a short-term study and it's a non-competitive Art. It just is what it is. The first things that should be clear are the base assumptions the teacher is making...don't like the asumptions? study somewhere else.

whatever the aim or focus people choose, the market is flooded with mystics, sheisters and fakes. The worst and most abundant are the posers (or just clueless) that advertise a certain benefit of training, but then teach another method that is not best suited to the stated benefit.

matter of fact, the stated benefit of kata practice is so misrepresented, that casual observers and people who have been had, understandably come to the conclusion that kata does not meet it's claims.

it's not that kata doesn't meet it's claims...it's that the claims themselves are too often deceptive and/or wishful thinking.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:21 PM

I just want to say that i had a beautiful post written before this but it apparently took too long and would not accept it. Ill do my best to reproduce it in its full glory.

There were some good posts put up. There were also some cop out answers. Its to be expected. Ill give an example. "The instructor did not teach the form correctly" or "he did not fully understand the form he taught me". Well thats very like as there probably few if any TMA who understand what there art really is. Lets look at a few things. All arts, essentially were created for the purpose of combat. For ages many of these arts were preserved, and taught solely in kata, which also means it was stored solely in the human mind as it was not put into printed word for some time. Now, Im sure all or most of remember the classroom experiment where one person wispers a word into someones ear. It continues in this manner until the message arrives to the original sender. Most times the message had been altered or changed completely. Now imagine the entire curriculum for an art being taught in this manner in a martial arts game of charades.

Its no wonder you hear other cop outs like "he must not understand kata" Or " you didnt spend enough time doing kata to truly learn from it" Why learn something that could not be taught properly and hasnt been for hundreds of years? Learn from someone who doesnt have any more idea about what he is doing than the new guy in the corner? No thank you. Also, I dont need fifteen years in a single art, studying patterned preset movement to realize that it isnt alive training. I dont need fifteen years to pull a few techniques from a few dead patterns as some of you profess. The truth is, there is nothing within kata that cant be yeilded from another form of training. Often the results are yeilded faster than the average TMA whose struggling over his "mysterious pattern". No modern era system of note uses it. Muay Thai? Boxing? BJJ? Jkd? Thats a no on all counts. You might find some in Muay Thai but you probably would have to visit Thailand for that.

With that said, I respect most all TMA. Your a dedicated lot. Some of you have real skill. But join the rest of the world guys. Its not the 1500's anymore. Keep your style but train it in a way that could actually serve its purpose. Combat. All things are meant to change. You wouldnt use the same attack over and over again would you? And all things are meant to be questioned.

If you dont question your training how could you ever hope to improve within it or upon it?
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:25 PM

so in other words, you didn't read my last two posts.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:38 PM

I really don't understand your arguements Chen. You want to argue that kata aren't as effective as other training methods,good,fine,don't do kata,duh.
Kata is my personal choice to do and to teach. Get out of it what you can and I'll teach you everything I know about them,the very few that I do.You don't want to do kata go to someone else.
If we sparred with whatever rules and I win does that mean kata rules? No..just as if you won(as if).
Kata is just a way I like to train and put into practice.I could give a rat's a$$ if I was the only one doing them.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:38 PM

Well, if you feel like the post isnt directed to you then perhaps it isnt. But then again with comments like, "You must have trained at a mcdojo" Or "you just simply dont understand kata cause your training was bad" then perhaps it is.

Maybe you didnt read my post.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:43 PM

And we have finally reached the point where all we're doing is grinding our gears. The party is over and all the hot chicks have gone home. There's no one left but the losers who weren't lucky enough to "get any". The room is a wreck and smells of cigarettes, beer and the faint scent of someone who's [censored] in their pants. Someone is passed out in the bathroom hugging the commode.

Which could only mean, it's time to stop giving the midget that's still awake the once over, find the keys and take the back roads home.


-John
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:47 PM

LOL, Man Me and you gotta hit that party John. You bring the booze Ill bring the midget!
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:51 PM

I remember those days all too well Chen . I've been on those back roads a few rides too often. My partying days are in my rearview mirror.


-John
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:56 PM

LMAO. Denny's anyone?

(btw Chen, we established that most places teach crap kata...I was just using the agreed upon odds (90% chance) that your kata training was crap. )

lol...good thread.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 10:57 PM

I hear ya Bro! Mine pretty much ended with children. At an early age too, but I wouldnt trade a moment of it. Now its more along the lines of a casual drink over dinner.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 11:07 PM

so, that settles it then...you and John have destroyed the myth that kata takes so little time to learn, it allows for enough hours in the day for partying or spending time with the family.

Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 11:18 PM

Well, I understand better then. Excuse me. But I would respond by saying that just because a school utilizes kata that its a McDojo per se. I actually have a good deal of respect for TMA. I simply see room for improvement. Isnt interaction and exchange the purpose of this place? Its easy to point at others but how about ourselves? I could easily be writting this thread about the flaws of MMA training. kata just wouldnt have been on the list.


As for spending time partying, thats not me. And the family life, I wish I had more time for. Are you not a family man?

So I once again propose the question" How does a martial artist, or anyone for that matter, excel in their trade, or improve the trade itself, without first questioning the very thing they partake in ?
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 11:41 PM

assuming that you know I was joking and keeping with the lighter mood the thread took...I'll answer anyway:

yes, I have partied but not much as I got older. yes, I have family and all the normal responsibilities thereof.

Quote:

How does a martial artist, or anyone for that matter, excel in their trade, or improve the trade itself, without first questioning the very thing they partake in?



they simply can't. but what they can do is be aware of the asumptions they make. as things become apparent, they may change their assumptions.

nobody asks themselves exactly the right questions before they step into the first class. often people don't know what they want until they see it.

what assumptions does your training make?...and what assumptions do you have for your training?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/12/06 11:52 PM

Much respect Ed.

As for assumptions, my training assumes that the shortest, most direct attack is the best way to go and my assumptions for my training would HAVE to be that it will work for me, otherwise why would I bother in the first place right? So what about yours?
Posted by: ANDY44

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 05:47 AM

Quote:




.
Quote:


and my assumptions for my training would HAVE to be that it will work for me, otherwise why would I bother in the first place right? So what about yours?




Fine what happens if the technique that works best for you is your opponents favourite move to use a counter against? and you don’t have the right technique to use on your opponent? To many variables. Sounds like some JKD teachings that I have read about.

Swiftly moving on from my last posting, when the said technique is finaly trained so it can be used then performing the Kata daily will keep the technique in a persons mind. Add to that one technique the other techniques available in kata then performing kata daily gives a way of keeping all the techniques available for use


So what myth are you destroying?

Just a small point about the Heians is that on grading to 2nd Dan or 3rd Dan a black belt in some karate organisations has to show they can still do them with more advanced technique applications etc

So are they basic? Nope I dont think they are. On going perhaps.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:24 AM

and much respect back atcha, bro.

I assume that kata was created with the intention of ending confrontation as soon as possible. originally for killing on a battlefield(as last resort if the soldier/guard had no weapons of course), the kata was gradually and slightly adapted over time towards civil self-protection. (*see added part below for slightly off-topic point.)

My goal is not self-defense or killing on a battlefield. If those were my goals, I think specialized modern military training and modern police training are better ways to accomplish them in this day and age. my goal is learning what kata has within my Art of choice.

why is it my Art of choice? I grew up with it and it suits me.

if it bothers people that my assumptions and goals are self-referencing...oh well. do what you enjoy, and try not to call it something that it's not.


*off-topic point - I beleive these things based on what I see and read. I have a faily good sense of whats bunk and historic spin, and my assumptions are indeed biased but not unfounded. kata could very well be contained principles after the fact - meaning someone appropriately skilled and imaginitive constructed them - not necessarily as a training device for military...but rather as a teaching device for instructors. over time, the needs of the students change - and so did the emphasis of what was taught. The notion of 'secrets' and only teaching those who displayed personal responsibility makes sense in the same way we try to keep criminals from having guns. Why would anyone want to teach the principles of how to destroy another person to a general population? ..and especially on a small island muchless the world. better to show them the abstract form for health benefit and adding a rhetoric for making better people. strip away all of the cusion, and it's clear raw kata is not intended for negotiated peace-making or inner-reflection. just my current view anyway.

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:28 AM

Quote:


Fine what happens if the technique that works best for you is your opponents favourite move to use a counter against? and you don’t have the right technique to use on your opponent?





That's called fighting Andy, and it happens. When you train constantly against resistance, you get accustomed to these things and learn to move on and improvise in the moment.


Quote:


Just a small point about the Heians is that on grading to 2nd Dan or 3rd Dan a black belt in some karate organisations has to show they can still do them with more advanced technique applications etc





Against someone fighting them back?


You see Andy, if you want to learn how to fight, you HAVE to train against people who are fighting you BACK! That is the simple, honest truth.

Solo kata doesn't do that as much as you believe it will, which has been part of my point.




-John
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:51 AM

Quote:

Matt,Leo,John: kata and practice based on point-sparring teach 2 separate things.




Ok, if you're talking point sparring without contact, I'd agree with you. However, if you're talking point sparring with the potential for KO, I disagree. You could look at the UFC today as point sparring with the potential for win by KO, because the winners of matches can be determined by the performance of the fighters (in its beginnings it couldn't be called point sparring, because wins were only determined by submission). Hence, as long as there is contact and KO potential, sparring has value in its own right.

I don't undervalue kata. As I said:

Quote:

I believe that these kinds of training have separate goals and are less related than most people think. Bagwork builds muscular strength and develops full punching force against a resisting surface. Partner drills develop response times and accuracy. Sparring develops technical application, strategy and timing. Kata develops spatial awareness, technical control and automated response.




Kata is good for what it teaches. It teaches many elements of fighting and is a good tool to learn with.

The problem arises when people pretend that it teaches things that it doesn't. What it doesn't teach you is how to fight against an intelligent or "unpredictable" human being. You can imagine as much as you want what a human opponent would do in your kata but you'll probably be surprised by human ingenuity when you encounter it. Sparring trains you to deal with human ingenuity, which I believe is one of the major deciding factors in a fight. When your opponent does the unexpected, your kata training will not help you.

I believe there's a famous quote "everybody's got plans... until they get hit".

Furthermore, you probably don't get hit hard when doing kata, which means that you're not prepared for such a thing if you only train using kata.
Posted by: ANDY44

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:59 AM

[
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 10:53 AM

Not a reply to Andy--his was just the last one here.

In reading thu the posts I am impressed with the amount of good information and arguements presented---on BOTH sides

Wish folks had spent a bit more time in throughly reading thu and responding to the information presented.

In my opinion there was a bit to much of people just stating and re-stating their postion and too little actual debate--but overall--good discussion.

Thanks for having it---deep bow!
Posted by: nahate

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 12:23 PM

If in trying to explain the results of kata training I used language that seemed like gibberish that is because words are incapable of capturing something that is so purely physical. And unfortunately the very inadequacy of words for this task gives cover to all kinds of charlatans and mountebanks who want to impress the gullible "grasshoppers.” I have been alternately amused and chagrined by some of what I’ve read or heard. But if words could communicate clearly what kata does, we could dispense with kata altogether and just follow written instructions.

Kata is clearly not the quickest way to self defense. It is however, in my experience, the most complete. If my first post seemed to disparage ancillary methods, I apologize. I heartily endorse resistance training as well as working against live partners. You won’t get much useful skill without these. I have also profited from makiwari and heavy bag feedback. If I swung the pendulum too far, it was in reaction to the notion that kata is a vestigial relic, some quaint but unnecessary martial appendix in need of removal. As I am nearing the halfway mark of my fourth decade of nearly daily kata practice it may be that I am the quaint relic. My experience and understanding of kata differs from what it may have been in my earlier decades. But we train to grow and make progress. I think I have some insights of value if you can empty your teacup a little and allow me to decant.

Anko Itosu in his famous precepts prescribed lowering the shoulders and firming the tanden while punching. After about three years of such training, he claimed the body would become transformed. In Patrick McCarthy’s The Bubishi, Zeng Cishu, one of the early White Crane masters recommends “a constant but pliable tension around the serratus and latissimus muscles and observes that tigers pull down their prey with their entire body, using their talons merely to make contact. The pelvic tilt, the lifting of the pelvic floor, proper breathing, all these are not encountered in everyday activity and would therefore not likely be used in a self defense crisis. But training in kata develops an awareness of these integrated body dynamics and ingrains them so that they become natural responses. It is the inclusion of these types of body dynamics that sets the Asian martial arts apart from their western sport counterparts. And yes, I am aware that boxing and wrestling do have subtle dynamics that are taught and practiced. They do not however play as important a role and lack the profundity of classical Asian arts. Although training in basics and against objects should include this body awareness, the techniques are isolated and transitional movement is largely absent.

Sparring can mean many things and can provide feedback and promote confidence. What I described in jest, but unfortunately too frequent accuracy, related to competition type sparring with the opponents warily circling each other looking for an entry or escape from a long distance technique. Deriving bunkai from kata can suffer the same distortions as understanding the topic of a phone conversation by hearing one of the talkers. Our guesses can often be completely wrong!
Conditioned by sparring, we may see a forward step in a kata as an attempt to penetrate someone’s guard or a backward movement as an attempt to avoid a strike, when either would more probably involve controlling the attacker while countering.

When I worked as a police officer, my striking was limited to kicking down doors. But it was the quick and strategic transitional movements that were second nature from kata practice that enabled me to gain and keep the upper hand with resisting offenders.

Nobody knows for sure where and when kata first appeared. The best speculation is that it was developed to enhance partner drills based on chinna skills. Without the need to be concerned for a partner’s safety, techniques could be practiced with fully effective power and the practice could continue after everyone else had gone home.

Katas have been the primary vehicle through which martial movement has been learned, developed, and transmitted since the history of karate has been documented. While it is not the fastest way to develop fighting prowess, nor is it complete in itself, it retains the dynamic essence of karate and deserves careful consideration as the centerpiece of karate training.
Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 01:10 PM

Quote:

If in trying to explain the results of kata training I used language that seemed like gibberish that is because words are incapable of capturing something that is so purely physical. And unfortunately the very inadequacy of words for this task gives cover to all kinds of charlatans and mountebanks who want to impress the gullible "grasshoppers.” I have been alternately amused and chagrined by some of what I’ve read or heard. But if words could communicate clearly what kata does, we could dispense with kata altogether and just follow written instructions.




If you can't put it into words, we'll just have to trust it as mysticism. I'd rather not put my faith solely in such a device, but it does suit some people clearly. I use kata training to develop my understanding of techniques.

Quote:

But training in kata develops an awareness of these integrated body dynamics and ingrains them so that they become natural responses.




Qualify this statement, please. How does kata differ in the development of body mechanics from bagwork or partner drills?

Quote:

It is the inclusion of these types of body dynamics that sets the Asian martial arts apart from their western sport counterparts. And yes, I am aware that boxing and wrestling do have subtle dynamics that are taught and practiced. They do not however play as important a role and lack the profundity of classical Asian arts.




Western martial arts are only less profound in your mind. Coming from the "East" myself, I don't subscribe to such mysticism. The dynamics of western MA appeal to me equally as those of eastern MA.

Quote:

Although training in basics and against objects should include this body awareness, the techniques are isolated and transitional movement is largely absent.




If you're not using transitional movement in your bagwork, you're not training it right. Who said it's a good idea to train bagwork statically? Have you read the thread on defensive movements in bagwork on the JKD forum?

Quote:

Sparring can mean many things and can provide feedback and promote confidence. What I described in jest, but unfortunately too frequent accuracy, related to competition type sparring with the opponents warily circling each other looking for an entry or escape from a long distance technique.




This is a good tactic, it can keep you out of range of an edged weapon and helps you keep wary of your opponent's movement. It also helps you tell when an opponent is going to attack, which is absolutely essential as a part of close quarters combat.

Quote:

Deriving bunkai from kata can suffer the same distortions as understanding the topic of a phone conversation by hearing one of the talkers. Our guesses can often be completely wrong!




Wrong by who's standards? I use what works, not what people tell me is right and I tend to think that bunkai when used properly will reveal techniques which can be applied in reality, whether the "ancient masters" knew it or not. Besides, the kata I train in Jujutsu are directly related to their practical applications; there is no bunkai in my kata. I believe the same is true of many of the original Okinawan Karate kata. In karate, things have become obscure because the meaning of kata has changed over time. Karate is rediscovering itself and in the process is subject to speculation.

Quote:

Conditioned by sparring, we may see a forward step in a kata as an attempt to penetrate someone’s guard or a backward movement as an attempt to avoid a strike, when either would more probably involve controlling the attacker while countering.




Now you're talking bunkai. You can't tell whether that's true unless you've used the technique on someone else. Most people who train kata don't do so with a partner and would benefit greatly from doing so.

Quote:

When I worked as a police officer, my striking was limited to kicking down doors. But it was the quick and strategic transitional movements that were second nature from kata practice that enabled me to gain and keep the upper hand with resisting offenders.




Are you saying that someone who trained sparring or heavy bagwork would not have been able to kick down doors? There are plenty of LEOs who have not trained in kata and are yet able to handle resisting attackers. I suggest asking around about this one.

Quote:

Nobody knows for sure where and when kata first appeared. The best speculation is that it was developed to enhance partner drills based on chinna skills.




Kata have been around since the 1400s in Jujutsu. My school originating in the 1600s trains kata as its primary mode of teaching. These kata are simple, one or two techniques in a row and always trained with a partner. Kata were trained in Okinawan styles of Karate too and from what I understand they started out as something trained with a partner, the same way as Jujutsu. MA training was more combat-like back then, with more contact between practitioners. In fact, from what I understand it was more like the contact levels found in MMA gyms today. There are some people who suggest that the "bunkai" of today derives from the throws which partners would apply on one another in the kata as it was practiced back then. I believe this to be the case. A small number of Karate schools still practice traditional kata in this fashion today.

From what I understand, it's mostly since eastern MA came to the west that kata have become solo exercises.

Quote:

Without the need to be concerned for a partner’s safety, techniques could be practiced with fully effective power and the practice could continue after everyone else had gone home.




You can't benefit from applying full power when punching or kicking the air. Punching and kicking can only be developed when used against a resisting surface. Punching and kicking the air with full power can cause joint problems in the long run.

Quote:

Katas have been the primary vehicle through which martial movement has been learned, developed, and transmitted since the history of karate has been documented.




Not from what I understand. Some of the other guys here will also disagree this statement.

Quote:

While it is not the fastest way to develop fighting prowess, nor is it complete in itself, it retains the dynamic essence of karate and deserves careful consideration as the centerpiece of karate training.




Uh huh.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 01:38 PM

just playing devil's advocate all the time Leo, is not very imaginative.

try this: state your disagreement and contrast with your experience....you DO have experience with kata learning, don't you?
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 03:05 PM

LEO

Yes and no.

Kata in classical japanese arts usually refers to a 2 person exercise.

Kata in okinawan, or the chinese equvilent is generally seen as a solo exercise--not really a matter of date.

They use different terms for the partner stuff.

Kata are however probably one of the oldest extent training methods, and argueably the widest spread--argueably.

I say again that kata was never supposed to be seen/used as a "stand alone" method of training--either in Okinawa or China.

It was supposed to be used with along with:

-Strength training
-Body conditioning
-Endurance training
-Hitting stuff-various bags/makiwara
-Resistive 2 person drills

etc and so forth.

As Pat McCarthy suggests and I agree, kata, were mainly methods to practice techiniques that had already been learned in 2 person drills/bag etc.

You can teach the kata first and then pull the techniques out for practice on the bags/with partners etc---but I think it works better the other way.

Posted by: Leo_E_49

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 04:07 PM

Quote:

just playing devil's advocate all the time Leo, is not very imaginative.

try this: state your disagreement and contrast with your experience....you DO have experience with kata learning, don't you?




I'm not playing devils advocate here. I'm saying that kata is not useful for fighting training. I disagree that it alone or as the focus of a training regimen can be used as training to teach someone how to fight. It's good for other things but not for fighting training.

I've about 17 years under traditional martial arts, so I guess you could say that I trained kata. However, I came to realise the importance of sparring over kata in the case of applying my techniques to a combat situation. I've never studied a martial art which doesn't have kata. I've written essays on various of my own opinions about what amounts to bunkai, revealing many practical applications for techniques and stances the WTF TKD Taegeuks which more than a few people agree are valid.

cxt has pointed out the difference between Okinawan and Japanese kata because I was not acquainted with the Okinawan style. My understanding is that as a partner drill, kata can be more directly related to combat. However, partner drill style kata should progress into actual sparring and randori in order for such techniques to be fully understood. I believe that practicing kata without a partner does not give a complete understanding of it. Fighting is inherently a multiple combatant activity. It takes two to tango as they say, pretending that solo training prepares you completely for this is only fooling yourself.

Kata is valuable but people make kata out to be what it isn't. They pretend that it is the best method for learning how to deal with a hand to hand combat situation. I maintain that while it is a good method for progressing to an understanding of what can be done in such a situation, it's far from the epitome or centre of MA training if your goals are to be able to fight against an opponent.
Posted by: Rumble

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 06:33 PM

IMO I dont believe in Kata or forms. In kata and forms there is too much memorization and thinking of set patterns and routines that lead no where but in actual fighting combat you dont think or follow set patterns you REACT to the unexpected. Or like Bruce Lee says dont think FEEL.lol
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 06:39 PM

Quote:

IMO I dont believe in Kata or forms. In kata and forms there is too much memorization and thinking of set patterns and routines that lead no where but in actual fighting combat you dont think or follow set patterns you REACT to the unexpected. Or like Bruce Lee says dont think FEEL.lol




Kata does exist.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:02 PM

Quote:



Kata does exist.





You are correct. Neither does chi.




-John
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:09 PM

Rumble

That is what you get when you take fighting advice from an actor
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 07:25 PM

Whoa whoa whoa. Below the belt there buddy.
Posted by: Rumble

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 08:45 PM

Quote:

Quote:

IMO I dont believe in Kata or forms. In kata and forms there is too much memorization and thinking of set patterns and routines that lead no where but in actual fighting combat you dont think or follow set patterns you REACT to the unexpected. Or like Bruce Lee says dont think FEEL.lol




Kata does exist.




Yeah I know it does exist just like chi but what I meant is that I dont believe in training in it as it has little to no benefits in actual combat.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 08:55 PM

Oh no. you mentioned Chi on a RBSD forum. Not going to go over well.
Posted by: Rumble

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 09:06 PM

Quote:

Oh no. you mentioned Chi on a RBSD forum. Not going to go over well.


Im just playing with Jkogas as he mentioned chi first lol.....
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 09:11 PM

Poor Poor Rumble. I know, but now he is probably going to obliterate you. Sorry. you wil be missed.
Posted by: Rumble

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 09:21 PM

Quote:

Poor Poor Rumble. I know, but now he is probably going to obliterate you. Sorry. you wil be missed.




lol hahahahahaha he cant obliterate me because I have the power of CHI
Posted by: oldman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/13/06 11:21 PM

He can't. I can.


NVA Termination Executed 10:25
Posted by: ANDY44

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/14/06 12:16 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

IMO I dont believe in Kata or forms. In kata and forms there is too much memorization and thinking of set patterns and routines that lead no where but in actual fighting combat you dont think or follow set patterns you REACT to the unexpected. Or like Bruce Lee says dont think FEEL.lol




Kata does exist.




Yeah I know it does exist just like chi but what I meant is that I dont believe in training in it as it has little to no benefits in actual combat.




Have you trained a Kata? with some of the correct kata application?
So a kick to the thigh practiced as an application in kata that would do as much damage as a well placed kick to the thigh found in MMA's isnt combat?
Do you know which kata it is in?


Chi isnt I believe part of the discussion?
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/14/06 10:10 AM

Hello Butterfly:

<<"I pass gas on both sides of the wall, but am still above it..."

(Definately am part of that group)

Jeff


-B


Posted by: ANDY44

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/14/06 10:23 AM

Quote:

Well, I understand better then. Excuse me. But I would respond by saying that just because a school utilizes kata that its a McDojo per se. I actually have a good deal of respect for TMA. I simply see room for improvement. Isnt interaction and exchange the purpose of this place? Its easy to point at others but how about ourselves? I could easily be writting this thread about the flaws of MMA training. kata just wouldnt have been on the list.


As for spending time partying, thats not me. And the family life, I wish I had more time for. Are you not a family man?

So I once again propose the question" How does a martial artist, or anyone for that matter, excel in their trade, or improve the trade itself, without first questioning the very thing they partake in ?




Quote from Ian aberneathy's website


http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/The_Karate_Guard.asp


Here is a whole heap of information about kata etc.
What do you think to the articles?
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/14/06 10:26 AM

Hello Chen Zen:

Wish there were an "active gif" of the Thinker statue....
<thoughtful sigh>

How about kata fundamentally being the B-A-S-E-L-I-N-E ???? Put the defender in ~absolute neutral~ (everybody MUST put their hands in the same identical spot to cancel out her height advantage, my mass advantage, his speed, etceteria....) (ie To prevent some personal quirk, or attribute interfearing with the achieved results the group is trying to figure out)

Everybody starts from the identical "neutral" spot to examine-explore the attack technique in question From that vulnerable-neutral starting point you add the endless various issues which exist within kata.

Body shifting...
Structural advantage...
Efficent leverage...
Etceteria...


Perhaps that explains kata somewhat ?
Jeff
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/14/06 10:45 PM

Chen

But "below the belt" is where a lot of good targets are!

Yes, soooooooooooo, just kidding around.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/14/06 10:51 PM

Quote:

Hello Chen Zen:

Wish there were an "active gif" of the Thinker statue....
<thoughtful sigh>

How about kata fundamentally being the B-A-S-E-L-I-N-E ???? Put the defender in ~absolute neutral~ (everybody MUST put their hands in the same identical spot to cancel out her height advantage, my mass advantage, his speed, etceteria....) (ie To prevent some personal quirk, or attribute interfearing with the achieved results the group is trying to figure out)

Everybody starts from the identical "neutral" spot to examine-explore the attack technique in question From that vulnerable-neutral starting point you add the endless various issues which exist within kata.

Body shifting...
Structural advantage...
Efficent leverage...
Etceteria...


Perhaps that explains kata somewhat ?
Jeff


Sounds like Point sparring to me. Perhaps you could explain in a little more detail so that i may give a more thorough response.

Cxt, Got me there pal!
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/15/06 09:12 PM

Hello Chen Zen:

Wow, been a lot of traffic this weekend... yikes!

<<Point sparring to me.

Ummmmngh, ok, but ~point sparring~ would be step 2A/3.
1 Would be the basic techniques, and the time to engrain them solo.
2 Would be the mechanics, and concepts of kata.
2A/3 Point Sparring would be exploring (slowly to start) how well I really had the movements & ideas.

<<Perhaps you could explain in a little more detail

It might take me some time, things will be busy for the next few days, let me see what I can do (sic. if anything ) to flesh this out a bit...

Do we have any ~common ground~ to start with? What kata are you comfortable/familiar with? Again one aspect of my basic hypothesis being kata help us all start from a single neutral spot. Quirks, intensities, physical attributes are negated somewhat so that we can all examine the same attack from the identical structural locations and seemingly vulnerable.

Kata help explore concepts and mechaics of power and the assorted systems for producing same for minimal effort.


Jeff
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/15/06 09:54 PM

I understand what you mean by exploring the different aspects of the technique slowly to see that you have "learned" it. Sounds like a drilling excercise other than there is no resistance in your version. In mine, there is progressive resistance. Little to none at first, then some more, and it progresses until its time for a student to use it in free sparring against a fully resisting opponent. To me that resistance is key to properly learning how to use the technique and rather or not the technique is worthy of being in your self defense arsenal.
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/17/06 10:51 AM

Hello Chen Zen:

<<other than there is no resistance in your version.

Apparently I was badly unclear if you perceive our method that way. I apologize. We use the same approach is seems. Begun in the reverse order (immediate total resistance) no skill building happens. Primitive survival instinct is triggered rather than calling on learned skill.

Resistance is good, but not the first, second, third... well not for a while!
J
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/17/06 10:04 PM

Well, then it seems we agree somewhat. Of course you cant jump into the mix right from the begining. Everything worth knowing takes time
Posted by: billyg

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 10/26/06 04:58 AM

Quote:

Rumble

That is what you get when you take fighting advice from an actor




Hi Guys.
I am new to the forum. Could I ask a question? Kata (forms etc) do they contain techniques for self defence?
If so would weapon’s self defence also come in to this category?

Billy-G
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/02/06 08:59 AM

Quote:

Hi Guys.
I am new to the forum. Could I ask a question? Kata (forms etc) do they contain techniques for self defence?
If so would weapon’s self defence also come in to this category?

Billy-G




They absolutely contain self defense techniques. I don't train weapons defenses from them myself.
Posted by: RoninKurosawa

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/11/06 01:35 PM

Whatever i say is only reletive to me and my own understanding but i'll say a small amount.

Just to be clear on where i stand on this issue i'll first say that I do not train kata, I train shadow boxing, as well as solitary and one on one drills. One on one sparring in my opinion is the most important thing in self defence.

Methods that i incorperate in my way are Wing Chun: Basic wing chun drills, Bagua: Catwalk and Catwalk with my own drills, Western boxing: One on One sparring and training in a more western sense, I also incorperate Large joint locking where as small joint locking is unrealistic in my opinion. Those are basicly my methods I also train not just wing chun drills but wing chun its self.

All of these things i combine sometimes train them seperately sometimes united that is my way, all of this is my own expression of fighting.

To me Kata waste so much time and energy on a goal that could be acomphished just as well using shadowing boxing and simple drills. Not to mention that to automaticly apply a technique in actual combat you need to devote large amounts of time to Sparring with actual people or with resistence in that sense.

In self defence wise and only in self defence, my question and retorical answer is simple and direct. Why spend so much time and energy towards a goal as a martial artist when you can achive it far more quickly and with much less stress on the body by other methods such as shadowing boxing, drilling, and sparring.

And that retorical question is only meant as a strictly self defence question, in other words if you like doing kata for fun or traditionalism that is fine and i might even do the same for those reasons.

This will most likly be the only post i put on this subject since i am not here to argue and i have put my entire ideology and opinion in this one post, there is no reason for me to add anything else on this subject.

Everything i say i say of my own beleif and personal opinion so do not take any of this the wrong way i say it with a humble mind and positive spirit.

I hope these words may contibute to this thread in some way but until we meet again i hope you all enjoy life and do not take anything seriously instead become neutral without being neutral.
Posted by: Demonologist437

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/17/06 03:03 AM

If I may do so, a humble Karateka would like to first thank Mr. Chen for starting this thread. After reading into Bruce Lee's philosophy and the various other martial methods out there, I am beginning to get an idea of just how big the world is out there.

If I may say, I am coming to believe that martial arts when used to defend oneself or one's loved one's/dependents, the martial arts is about defeating the person.

If that is true, we should train in the most efficient way to do so.

Honestly, I did scoff at first when I read that line in one of the books published with Mr. Lee's words in it. But, after having reflected on them, my own place in the martial arts, and on other martial arts in a general sense, I perhaps would apologize to Mr. Lee for that scoff if I could.

Though I am still reluctant to totaly give up my forms, I find myself edging closer to it every day. Whatever purpose I recieved from them seems more like a memory than a current and defined fact. More and more, I find myself thinking about technique outside of the context of whatever form I seem to be working on. Instead of thinking about my techniques in terms of "Chinto" or "Heian", or "Nihanchi", I instead think of them in terms of that guitar player I saw at school, or the errant line my English teacher mentioned, or the occasional martial arts/martial arts inspired video I find on the internet. Or, in terms of the writings of such amazing people such as Mr. Lee, Kensei Miyamoto Musashi, or Matt Furey.

In other words, I have been thinking more and more about my techniques in terms of all I see around me and how they all connect and relate back that single fundamental spark that was the precursor to setting ablaze the universe. Not to pat myself on the back or be prideful, but it's really how I am starting to see my technique.

So, it is making less and less sense to me to see technique in terms of my kata, or even as technqiue at all. Even then, I find my mind thinking less of "Hm, that would make for an interesting reaction." but rather "You know, that is very much like or seems to have relation to one or more of my basic concepts for grappling/striking, or Kyusho-Jitsu."

Again, if I state all of this as true, and that is where my heart as amrtial artist is going, how much longer can I retain the will to continue the practice of my forms?

Well, because there really is some internal fear that I will somehow shrivel as a martial artist if I quit practicing them together. Also, I would fear the gaze of my old sensei, if I came to them and it somehow slipped out that I no longer find it necessary for me as a martial artist to continue kata practice.

Honestly, I clicked on the JKD section to find a solid reason WHY it is should quit practicing all of my katas; sans the Qi-Gong ones that I do believe have much practical medical application.

So, I would venture to add: Is it possible that, I cannot know what is best for another person?

I ma not you, and you are not me. What right do I have to tell YOU how YOU should train? I can make suggestions, and show you what has worked for me and many other people to get you started. But really, can I tell you what is right or wrong for you, or anyone?
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/17/06 06:57 AM

The bottom line is, do what you enjoy doing. If that's kata, so be it. Number one overall thing you should definitely do is to enjoy yourself. If training is not fun, why do it?

What gets me are people who tell you that you absolutely HAVE to do kata in order to become a complete fighter and that just isn't the case.

Do you need kata to help beginners who aren't ready for total resistance? Of course not. You'd use PROGRESSIVE resistance and variable intensity, dialing up and down the energy of any drills you're doing. But these aren't solo drills, there is no reason for them. Every single phase of training can be done with a partner, and should be.

-John
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/17/06 09:52 AM

Im not quiet old enough to be called Mr. but thanks anyways and your welcome for the conversation.
Posted by: Demonologist437

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/17/06 02:32 PM

Indeed.

As a martial artist, I just try not to just ignore those words of Mr. Lee because really, that's the third time around we have heard "The highest form is no form." or, "Focus only on striking your opponent."

-Miyamoto Musashi says "Think only of cutting." about, what maybe thirty times a page from "Book of Water" on? In addition, there is his lengthy message about "Attitude no-Attitude" which basically states that, you should not get hung up on forms, but simply use whatever method will defeat your enemy; be it a a formalized technique or not.

-Yagyu Munenori said around the same time: "The final state of any discipline is where you forget what you have learned, discard your mind, and accomplish whatever you set out to do without being aware of it yourself. You begin by learning and reach the point where learning does not exist."

And then of course, Mr. Lee's "Forms are not the way..."

I believe, that we Karateka should not get too worked up about perhaps changing our methodology a little; or as Mr. Lee said discarding a little to provide the best methods possible.

Again, if this idea of "End point and goal being style of no-style," or "Do not worry about anything other than cutting." has come up this many times AND uttered by some very competent martial artists, maybe we shoudl look a little more closely.

As I said, I'm still not quite there yet as to totally releasing my kata. But as I also said I would not be surprised if in the next week.

So, perhaps in the not-to-distant future Mr. Chen may be able to count one convert from all of this voluminous posting.
Posted by: RoninKurosawa

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/17/06 06:34 PM

My attitude is like yours Jkogas, I'm not completely against forms I'm just bothered by people who think that there is no other correct way to train for self defence.

Forms are useful in terms of memorizing alot of techniques at one time which is what i think they are meant to be used for. But now days instead of going back to simplicity people seek to complacate everything, they think for it to work it has to be very complex but isn't that the oppisite of what common sense would dictate as effective.

I even like forms in some ways, I think they are beautiful and good for your health but they arn't the best way for self defence training at all in my opinion.

Its obvious to me for something to work to its fullest potencial it needs to be simple and direct or simple complexity like directly indirect or indirectly direct.

Its not that people shouldn't train forms its that they should not let forms rule their mind and beliefs on martial arts. For instance for JKD you are surpose to know different forms and methods so that you can cut them down to their essentials in order to make all the knowledge you have acumalated most effective.

Well I'll see you guys later, I have to watch Avatar the last air bender in not long which is one of my favorite shows.
Posted by: Ronin1966

Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/19/06 11:10 PM

Hello :

Good words, honest words.... politely and I hope respectfully, I disagree with the core/fundamental belief-premise though.

Too many forget the gentleman was a traditionally trained practitioner for many YEARS... and consistantly so before he reached his current written conclusions and almost mythic status

<<martial arts is about defeating the person.

Them or ourselves... I earnestly wonder?

Perhaps then like now, kata was many things to many different people/philosophies of training? As a method of proverbial "bread crumbs" I found & still find kata amusingly efficent & obscenely effective at conveying information from one person to another.

Whether I comprehend all the layers whispered, hinted, or glaringly on the surface will depend on my commitment & persistance at genuinely wanting to understand the many paths available. It will also depend on how well and on what levels I perceive different aspects.

Kata is not the "only way", but it is an breathtaking tool if I keep ~chipping away~ and wanting to understand its molten lava core.... Others will unfortunately feel differently.... live and let live...

Perhaps kata are merely a teaching method to explore how to produce power from positions/structures of seeming vulnerability/weakness? "....Hummmngh, I'm toast here, I wonder what happens if I breath differently..." any effect? "...Yikes, I ate that one... lets try again and see if I tighten up differently if that position can be as easily overwhelmed..." this type of thing...


Jeff
Posted by: Demonologist437

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/22/06 01:35 AM

Well, if I may then respectfully bring a few thinsg to ind then:

For one thing, yes Mr. Lee was "Classically Trained" for a good deal of time before reaching his conclusions on the martial arts.

But what does that have to do with anything? Many great men for a time followed in one direction(generally, with most fo the crowd) before breaking from it, and either creating something excellent or going down in history as a

Additionally, though I will admit kata can teach you something, it at best teaches you the raw idea as opposed to exact technique. I understand that in part that is why we train so hard, so that our ability to perform techniques in the re-al will improve, but that's half my point.

If the techniques we learn from kata are so rigid that we need to train extensively just to make them functional in a real situation, why not just jump ahead a step then and teach the form that you could actually use/apply, which even then usually amounts to the concept behind the technique.

As far as conveying a large amount fo information, I point to the source of kata's techniques: the basic concepts behind why the techniques work in the first place. rather than teach someone a whole rigid form, spend the time explaining to them, "If you punch forward while pulling his arm back towards you you get collision of forces/two-way action."

Giving somebody a concept and then a technique that goes along with it can work just as well, correct?

And, could not just trying to explore the basic concepts themselves take up quite a lot of time for the devoted?

Yes, kata can be okay. I'll admit, I still practice mine. Not as much as I used to though, and in a way rather removed from most fellow karateka. I quit thinking about "Well, he punched here and so I parry, kick, and smack him one in the jaw." but instead opt for "What is THIS movement, and how can I use it?"

But then again, even that is something you can get from anywhere. Watch the birds and you'll find martial secrets.

Personally, I know the whole kata thing can be rather polarizing, and I'll admit I was on the kata=martial arts for some time, but the name of what i do itself was what changed me:

Martial ART. Art means expression, and there can be no expression without "Creation"; to paraphrase Mr. Lee.

If we are all practicing the same static, many hundred year old forms, and practicing for the most part the same techniques as our sensei and sensei's before us, or ascribing to the same "methods" as everyone else in our respective style, where is the creation?

I mean, we all punch. And we all have combinations. But, if I go up to my sensei and say, "No, to me the down-counter is this.". Or totally eliminate all of the upper-body movements from a kata and proscribe it to people as the original, tried and true form my sensei would probably go into shock.

But, if I can express myself and create legitamte technique from it all, why not?

Further, I do not believe kata teaches you flow very well. Flow is not simply "A-B-C" but, "A-Z-F". "Flow" and "Fluidity" means to move seamlessly from one situation, one technique, to the next. And usually, it's not the next technique "In line", so much as it's their next movement/whatever changing condition may be in effect.

But, enough of my rants....

Personaly, at the end of the day, I believe very much that the "Kata/anti-Kata" discussion is like abortion.

Nobody makes a desicion on abortion based on "facts"; it always has to do with personal beliefs and opinions. The same for kata.

Honestly, I do not totally blame of some of the Japanese martial artists/Chinese Martial artists for trying to preserve their arts. After all, "Bujutsu" nearly died around WWII, and since many "Sword-Charlatans" have popped up proclaiming they are teaching "True battlefield combat arts".

And then, we all knwo how lovely all of the Communist tyrants were to China.

So, you know what, I say whatever you will.

Wow, I went all over the place...
Posted by: KJ63

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 04:31 PM

My two cents…
The biggest issue I have with kata is that you are attempting to reverse-engineer someone else’s movements and techniques. Or at least what you may think they were attempting to do with each of the movements. If you want to do a kata that has real value, then take 20 or so of your best techniques (the ones that actually work for you and not the ones that worked for someone else at another time and place), and make your own. You won't have to spend as much time with the how and why, and have more time for the actual application, and transition or flow. I believe that many of these, if not all of these kata started that way, and I believe it is why many of them have changed, because something in it may not have worked the same for someone else.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 06:10 PM

Excellent assertion.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 06:32 PM

That is a pretty good assertion.

I think that most martial artist that are lifetime practitioners will master only a handful of techniques. They will be able to apply them in different situations and under pressure.

I can think of many many techniques shown in most kata.

The problem here is another kata is being taught before the student grasps the one before it. Then the student has about twenty or more kata to "learn" because of rank requirements and $$$$$$$$$...... I believe you only need to know one to three kata and with these you have a muriad of techniques to explore and the fewer techniques you practice the more effective they will be. Do you need kata to do this? Nope,but I prefer them myself.
Posted by: oldman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 07:07 PM

In Bill Burgar's book "Five Years one kata" the author takes the position the each artist shold ultimatley work one kata of their own creation.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 07:16 PM

Which sounds to be a much more sensible approach to doing things. Each person must ultimately "create" his own style with the tools he's been given.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 09:45 PM

Hmmmmm.....Why not one already created that we make our own?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 11/24/06 10:44 PM

Good question. In all actuality thats all that martial arts is. Taking something someone else's interpretation and creating your own interpretation so that it will work for you.

The problem with taking an established kata and trying to do this would be, to me, that it has been done so many times and interpreted in so many ways by so many different people. Some or all of these interpretations may not be the same as your own. If you were to the opposite, and create one of your own interpretation, then I think it would be of much more value to you when trying to understand your own relationship with fighting and how you choose to perform it.
Posted by: Ronin1966

Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/07/06 10:39 AM

Hello Demonolog437:

Older thread I'll understand if you did not wish to pick it back up again. But found a "new" message on one of my marked favorite topics thought I'd take a shot, since I have a few moments...

The reason Lee's background is signifigant is obviously the historical context. Too many are unaware/oblivious of his traditional training and mimic his words lacking that knowledge. His previous training was the vehicle, the tools which he used, to eventually reach his infamous conclusion(s). If I merely copy the words and ignore the deeper contexts, I am misunderstanding huge pieces...

What do you mean by "raw"? Are you troubled by the perspective that movements of kata have many layers, rather than a sole, single usage for all eternity? Kata is obscenely precise as to its mechanics, and not haphazard, nor random in any manner. Purely on structural basis, my arms, feet, elbows, knees must be in certain precise parameters-positions or solely on structural basis my techniques will never withstand being attacked-tested...

Once I understand them, after learning how to do a fundamental technique, then I proceed forward to explore subtlities, nuances, and probems that arose in that training. Once understood better, I can examine smaller pieces and aspects... Am I missing something important of your perspective?

As to where the "creation", the art is... we are not our teachers, nor their instructors back to the beginning of ones art. As such, what I do, is the identical receipe with a different flavor... my art is my understanding of my instructors knowledge. It is mine and therefore unique to the person. Very similar but not identical.

Jeff
Posted by: Demonologist437

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/08/06 02:08 AM

Ah, what the schnell? I could use a nice martial art oriented idscourse via a cumbersome medium after anhilatting most of my brain cells in a whole days worth of college finals.

For one thing, I knew very well that Bruce Lee was brought up through ranks at first as a Wing Chun man. Honestly, what known martial artist hasn't been brought up in some sort of traditional/semi-traditional style at some point in their martial career before going off in other directions?

What i mean by "raw", is that kata only teaches the basic movement/idea really. I do not believe it shows you exact movements that you would carry through when actually applying the technique in a real self-defense situation.

Mostly because, it is one thing to have an uke in class grab you. It is another completely to have a random aggressor, who is most likely shaking you while throwing you around. If you have not brushed up much on flow, fluidity, or sensitivity at that point, he will most likely throw you down while you are struggling for a position to apply your technique. Or at least, that's been my exerpience when I try on a friend as opposed to someone from the dojo.

Honestly, whenever I've tried my technique either the once or twice I have been midly screwed with/sparred casually with my friends, I have neevr actually performed all the motions in whatever technqiue I was trying to apply that i learned in kata. Often, it was just the rough idea of strike arm/lock hand/strike face will trying to stick and move with him.

Further, if I am practicing what you taught me with my own perosonal "flair", it does not make it mine, since I still learned it from you.

And I probably should make this clear that: I still parctice kata in some form(pun, hehe) on my own. The reason why I sit closer to the non-kata happy side, si that i have ntoiced throughout my eight-odd years now of being a martial artist certian inadequacies which have also been shared by some of my peers. I do not blame my sensei, and I do not believe I am a crap martial artist.

When i apply some of the ideas of Bruce Lee, I notice these inadequacies seem to lessen, and so i am sticking with that until i find something else.

Do I exclame when i find a friend doing forms? No. Do I think forms will hurt you directly as a martial artist? No, since most people usually train in some form to make up for the things i listed.

Again, my primary issue with kaat is that it just doesn't seem to me to make a good basis for ALL techniques to flow from. And I do find it restricting at times, even when I am just casually sparring wiht my friends, to apply it's techniques as I have practiced them; and some very in depth.

If kata works for another, fanatastic. please, do nto let my words shy you away from it.

But again, for my own person I find myself aligning more with Mr. Lee's beliefs.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/08/06 06:39 AM

You could make a simple case and merely say, if you have a partner to train with, there's no point in doing kata. Everything you can do solo, you can do and do better with a living human being in front of you.


-John
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 02:04 AM

Then why shadowbox, do bag work or anythign liek that or not fight close to full on all the time?
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 08:36 AM

It should be obvious that shadow boxing isn't kata. If it were, there would be no reason for all of the different forms of kata out there. Everyone could just shadowbox. But they don't...they do kata. Right? I mean, many people like to make that analogy but the two are apples and oranges. As well, shadow boxing is more of a warm-up than anything else. It doesn't take up a large percentage of training time.

Bag work, running, weight lifting are all things that improve your attributes for fighting, but do not improve your fighting themselves. In other words, if all anyone ever did was bag work, running and weight lifting, they might get themselves in better shape, but that doesn't mean that they can fight worth a damn. They're not developing skill in application. That REQUIRES a living human partner to accomplish.

Honestly, you should simply know these things. It's just common sense.

Fighting "full-out" all the time causes unnecessary burn-out and injury. Plus there is no need. It's good to go harder on occasion, but to do so all the time is like constantly running your car at red-line. Not a real good idea.

The key is to work your timing more than anything else.


-John
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 03:52 PM

Who on here ever said kata was requierd anywya? It's just got some good benifits but is not essential.
Anyway, I never said SB is kata, I'm just pointing out your logic. You say basically that if you aren't training 'alive' with a partner then you wont get an better, yet you still use the heavy bag, speed bag probably, shadow boxing and other things which are not 'alive' much more than kata, especially when using by-rote combinations. You're contradicting yourself. And you think those exercises do no good for increasing your skills? I think that goes agaisnt common sense, if oyu practice oyur skills well you WILL get better. It's just how it works.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 08:37 PM

Stormdragon wrote:
Quote:

Who on here ever said kata was required anyway? It's just got some good benifits but is not essential.





I don’t believe anyone implied that anyone HERE said that kata was required. However, I HAVE heard people elsewhere imply that and say that in so many words. There ARE people out there who believe it as well and many folks on this forum probably do also. I am merely providing the counter point to that argument. I believe that the new kids getting into martial arts deserve to know the truth about the matter.


Quote:


Anyway, I never said SB is kata, I'm just pointing out your logic. You say basically that if you aren't training 'alive' with a partner then you wont get an better, yet you still use the heavy bag, speed bag probably, shadow boxing and other things which are not 'alive' much more than kata, especially when using by-rote combinations.




I don’t use a heavy bag that often, or a speed bag, or shadow boxing. This is primarily because I’m a grappler first and a striker second. I prefer to spend my training time working with partners as I have limited time to train as it is. Heavy bags damaged my shoulders years ago. At this stage, I just don’t see the purpose if I’m not planning on boxing.

However I will say this again, heavy bags do not make you a better fighter, only a more powerful striker. Equipment training alone will not develop your ability to fight anywhere NEAR the degree that training with a partner will. However, I would always rank equipment training above kata because at least you are able to go against resistance.


Quote:


You're contradicting yourself. And you think those exercises do no good for increasing your skills? I think that goes agaisnt common sense, if oyu practice oyur skills well you WILL get better. It's just how it works.





I think you’re not following me, as usual. Read slower if you have to.

Do you believe that fighting a bag will develop your timing for fighting a human being that hits you back?


Stormdragon, I’m just about done with you man. For the LIFE of you, you can’t follow what I’m saying. You take what I say out of context and twist it around. That makes it impossible to have a debate with you.

Working with equipment is like this; Imagine getting a grappling dummy and wrestling it. Then after having done that for a bit, you have this belief that now you can wrestle live human beings. I think if you believe that, you might possibly be insane. Yet you are saying the same thing about other bags. And about kata, etc.

Here is my opinion (so read carefully)

  • Kata has no relationship to a real human being anymore than a grappling dummy does. Training with EITHER will only help your skills in the most infinitesimal manner. That is my opinion.
  • Training on a heavy bag is fine if you want to develop explosive punching power. That is what it is designed for. That will NOT teach you how to fight however. That must be done through SPARRING. That is where you learn to APPLY your skills and to develop the TIMING for fighting.
  • Training on bags ALONE will not develop your ability to fight anymore than only doing weight lifting. They develop attributes that you can use for fighting, but do not develop your skills for fighting.


I seriously believe that you will (again) misconstrue everything that I have written and will take everything out of context. But, what the hell. I have nothing else to do at the moment……..



-John
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 09:11 PM

John,

I'd just like to point out that you are arguing with someone less than half your age and not anywhere close to your experience in life or ma.

With that said,hell, teenagers think they know everything. I did,now I can't remember any of it.

Both sides of the argument have been presented.

I think kata training has benefits,but the benefits can be gained elsewhere. That makes kata unnecessary for self defense imo. Still, no myth that I heard has been dispelled.

Do kata or do not,I really don't give a flying flip. If you learn from me though, you will do kata!!
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 09:28 PM

You know I dont agree with oyu, so you may as well be done now JK.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 10:05 PM

Stormdragon -

Got no beef with you personally and, I truthfully don't care if you and the rest of the forum agrees with me or not. I am out NOTHING if you don't.

All I try and do here is present another viewpoint. That's all we really CAN do on forums. If you don't happen to agree with my viewpoint, that's your prerogative. Do what suits you best.



-John
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 10:09 PM

THATS WHAT I"M DOING! I'm giving a counter point that I think is true that is obviously against yours. I'm arguing my point.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 10:11 PM

And you kinda asked for a cease fire.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 10:19 PM

Which is what I am giving him.


-John
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 10:32 PM

Fair neough, cease fire.
Posted by: Taison

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/09/06 11:48 PM

Being a youngster that knows everything , I agree with you here John.

Speedbag, heavy bag, etc, etc, is just to increase your attributes such as strength, stamina, agility, etc.

Real skills comes from "doing" it. Sparring is the only thing that will ultimately enchance skill. Timing, precision, strategy, strength and weakness are all found during sparring.

Punching a bag might develop explosive power, but the timing, method of delivery, accuracy and power comes from sparring with a living partner. For example, I can't really punch hard on those punching machines, but I am able to hit my opponent. Now, here's the million dollar question; what's the point in being able to punch hard when you can't hit?

Being a half-grappler, the case of "alive" sparring is even more important. There is really no way to practice Judo without doing it with a partner. There is no doll that gives resistance like a person.

In Kata, the throw is performed in one way, but in reality it depends solely on your opponent. Some throws are not possible on short stubby people, or tall dudes.

Kata isn't my favorite thing, but I don't neglect it. I usually look at one or two once every 4 month. I rather spend my time training or sparring where I can actually develop my acquired techniques and maybe copy others.

-Taison out
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/11/06 12:57 PM

after 15+ pages, hows your myth doing? did you destroy it yet?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/11/06 08:32 PM

Thoroughly eviscerated.
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/11/06 10:05 PM

What was the myth anyway?
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 12:10 AM

That kata will make you proficient in self defense.
Posted by: crablord

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 02:23 AM

all your base are belong to chen
Posted by: Mark Hill

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 07:52 AM

Quote:

Recently Ive been involved in several kata discussions, mainly involving Karateka. Trying not to steal threads I invited a few of them to the JKD forum to defend there stance on the issue. Since they have failed to do so then I will bring the conversation to them myself.

My first jab at it is that I dont think that kata are useful for anything other repetition of technique in which case there are far more valuable ways to do this. Also I believe that the mystery should be left out of it. There is too much interpretation for the student. Self defense should be taught in a more direct manner so that the benifits of such training can be yeilded quickly by the student.

Its just a jab. Ive got more. I want to remind everyone before the topic takes off, dont get personal. Lets have a intelligent discussion on the issue.




Recently I trained with a JKDist we stole and recruited into our style, I loved his close-in stuff.

But a lot of it was like what Mc Carthy teaches and I myself have found in kata.

Different transmission methods, that's all. Kata works for me. I couldn't get checking thigh kicks right until I practiced Ashihara's "Suzuki Kihon" for a while - it even showed me some self defence stuff I am now well trained in now, but didn't practice at all before. There is stuff I've learnt from kata I've never had to practice that often, even kata I haven't done many times and I can't apply the technique on the spot without thinking.

Two man drills used by CMA, MMA and TMA are so close to kata that it casts doubt on firm opposition to kata. All you need is realism in the drills and they are gold. Practice the most important concepts for repetition to learn a technique or self defence sequence or as a repository of techniques and you've got a kata there fella.

More importantly: Just shut up and train.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 08:57 AM

What Crab?
Posted by: crablord

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 10:26 AM

lol its an internet saying. Once you win something you say " all your base are belong to us". Wikipedia it
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 10:28 AM


Ya know, we have 15 plus pages of really good discussion here---most of it does not fit neatly into the box of someone "winning" or "loseing."

Hope folks don't see it that way.
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 11:49 AM

Kata combined with 'live' training and effective applications will indeed make you proficient in SD. The kata gives you the skills and techniques and the 'alive' training or 'live' training gives oyu the ability to apply them effectively.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 05:07 PM

I agree CXT. Its not about winning or losing, its about improvement.

Crab, thanks for the info. There base is mine.
Posted by: Mark Hill

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 05:45 PM

No cxt, they are just two ways of doing the same thing.

Butter side up!

(But not really diametrically opposed like butter side down or the commies).
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/12/06 06:24 PM

Mark

Nah, the only time it should be "butter side up" is when your makeing grilled cheese sandwichies--otherwise the butter gets all over your hands--ick.

If you drop your bread on the floor--you should throw it away regardless of the side it lands on--according to Mythbusters the old rule (3 or 5 seconds depneding on whom you ask) is bogus.
Posted by: Mark Hill

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/13/06 01:42 AM

I was thinking more like Dr Seuss.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 12/19/06 09:31 PM

Quote:

That kata will make you proficient in self defense.




That was too silly to ever be a myth but maybe it's only a partial quote taken out of context?

Properly applying kata CAN make you proficient in self defense.
Posted by: RoninKurosawa

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 09:50 AM

Well, first off i'm very sorry if this post offends anyone and that is not my intention my intention is to tell what i think works best and most practical for self defence training and self defence alone. Also people should not be offended by this because everyone has the right to say and believe what they want and what they think is right so please read all of this with a open mind. And if you don't agree with me thats fine but please do not get mad at me for my freedom to think and express my own thoughts.


And also i'm making this clear first ' I believe forms have their purposes mainly technique memorization but punching the air can not make someone profient in self defence in my opinion but even if it could it would takes many years for it to work and why spend so many years solely on kata when you can add sparring and be profient in a very short time considering the alternatives ' .

I believe the idea of ' Traditional kata ' making someone a profient self defence expert is due to traditionalism and kung fu movies. I use forms myself to memorize techniques but nothing more then memorization, like i said they have their purposes .

I believe forms were passed on to simply memorize techniques quickly but with time people started turning forms into some evident truth because people tend to do that to things in life.

The truth is the only way to become profient in combat is to fight people realisticly and practically. To me that seems very clear and direct almost like common sense. I think people should train kata but they should also do realistic sparring and at least full contact sparring sometimes.

Of course sparring can not replace real experience but its the closest thing you can get to a real fight in terms of training in a generally safer manner.

In conclusion i'll say this , kata do have a good purpose in training and that is to memorize techniques precisely and to increase speed of movement but kata training alone is no way to train for self defence. I agree that people should do kata to learn alot of techniques but for self defence they should full contact sparring with others and two man drills also are good for self defence training.

You should first learn the kata then take your kata techniques into free form full combat sparring, doing both of those is good for self defence but kata by its self is not. In life to be good at anything you need to know the proper balance and kata without sparring is the abbsence of balance. If you do kata and spar and drills then i would say balancing those three tools will help make someone good at self defence.

And when i say all this its completely without thought of traditionalism or philosophy, this is all based on how to scientificly and practiclly train for self defence.

If you do it for philosophy that is good to i also study philosophy but in self defence it should be mostly scientific in my opinion.

Anyway i'm completely sure alot of people will not like my opinions but just like everyone else i have the right to freely decide what works and what does not but i'm not telling anyone they have to believe this, only that it is what i believe to be the most practical self defence training methods.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 04:14 PM

Ronin

Good for you!

People should make up their own minds about things and do what works for them.

Training methods that don't show gains for the individual should be abandoned.

For me kata works--but then again, I do a lot more than just kata.

And so did the students back in the day.
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 09:08 PM

Sorry found this rather late.

Kata, well it is a good way of sorting students for grading, size and build matter in sparring so that isn’t a very fair test for who gets a grade and who doesn’t, but Kata is a good leveller.

The appeal to learn something new and complex is also a very strong appeal for Kata, I do find that to much of karate mystic wrapped up in Kata, excessive Bunkai really winds me, wrist grab here, eye strike, shoulder throw with jump,,,, FFS its rubbish.

As for the constant practice of a pre arranged sequence of moves , to program the students instincts in the event of a real world attack…. Please don’t tell me that your instructors tell you that OMG NO!!!!!

Practicing Kata makes you good at ONE THING ………. Any idea? KATA!!

Now before the Karateka jump on me, I hold a 5th dan in karate, I can perform
{very poorly now} all but 2 shotokan kata. I did enjoy practicing Kata.

But I always acknowledge that the time I spent practicing kata was time I wasn’t practicing martial arts, I was practicing dance….

BUT, what someone wants to do is their own business, and may they enjoy it, I just don’t like aspects of training being miss sold to gullible students

Regards

Mark

PS: Chen I remember you from this forum years ago, you still talk a lot of sense, my respect to you
Posted by: Katana83

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 10:48 PM

I am a late bloomer to this thread, too. This is not an attack against the posting to whom I am replying, I agree with you, so don't take offense. I am still figuring out how to work this forum thing. This is more of a general message to whom it may concern. Now that the caveat is out of the way here goes my two cents:

If you like training kata then train kata, if you don't then don't. It is that simple. The problem seems to be that people want to take their own opinion and force it upon everybody else as an ultimate truth. Is kata useful? It is up to you to decide that for yourself. Everybody has their own opinion, and that opinion is perfectly valid - for that individual. If you think kata is necessary then fine, it is necessary - for you. If you think kata is a complete waste of time then fine, it is a complete waste of time - for you. Either way, your opinion only applies to you and not everybody else, so everybody needs to stop trying to jam their opinion down the ma commmunity's throat. It is okay to have different opinions on things, especially on something as free and open as this. There is more than one way to skin a cat, either way the cat is going to be skinned, so you should skin it in the way that works best for you. Does kata help you? For some people yes, and for some people no. It all depends on what YOU make of it. It will help you if you decide to use it in a way that is going to help you. After all, personal responsibility comes into play at some point, something will only help you as much as you use it to help yourself.

So what is my opinion? Yes, kata is a valuable training tool - for me. I can't speak for you or for anybody else. However, I can speak for myself, and I can tell you that training kata has improved my overall focus and balance. I think of it as moving meditation, fists and feet are flying on the outside while everything is quiet and serene on the inside. Kata has taught me how to be calm amid the chaos, and for me, it really paid off both in sparring and in other areas of my life. I don't know if that is true for everybody who trains with kata. I don't even know if everybody else trains their kata with that mindset. I can only speak for me.

Does kata prepare you for a real fight? Heck no! However, nothing prepares you for a real fight but ACTUAL EXPERIENCE IN A REAL FIGHT. No matter how much sparring and "aliveness" training you do, you are not preparing for a real fight unless you engage in a real fight. That is one of those things where only experience can teach you. There is a big difference between sparring or rolling around with someone in a gym and actually defending against a sudden, unexpected attempt made on your life, god forbid. That's a whole other ball game. Everything changes when it is for real. You can do all of the live fire exercises you want to do, but it is never going to prepare you for actually fighting in a real war. A military veteran taught me that little fact.

So should I or anybody else stop practicing kata because it doesn't prepare for me for a real fight? If yes, then we all should stop practicing martial arts period and start going around and getting into real fights with everybody, because the only way that we can truly prepare for those conditions is train under those conditions. Punching and kicking the air won't help, but neither will sparring or rolling with an opponent who is not going to go all out to harm or even kill you, which is what the scenario would be in a real fight. Either way, it is unrealistic. However, sparring and aliveness training will help you out in certain ways, and that will improve your chances in a real fight, which is all that any of us can ask for. Kata will will help you out in certain ways, too. I know that it has helped me to focus and be calm amid the chaos, and that will certainly improve my chances in a real fight. They both are valuable training tools, so there is no need to tear down one or the other. Heck, you can do both. When I first learned heian shodan, sensei made the senior student actually run up to me and attack me at full speed during the kata. I nearly wet myself and my rhythm was all off, but it really helped with my kata training. It got really fun when the senior student started adding even more variations to his attacks and forcing me to adjust the timing, rhythm, and direction of the kata. If only it could've been recorded on video, a first place entry on funniest home videos !

So, do what works best for you. The only myth is that something can't help you out if you seriously train it. We can all benefit from any form of training, so we should all be open to every form of training. It is called humility.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 11:14 PM

Bump.

Longest thread in the history of FA?


-John
Posted by: Katana83

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 11:32 PM

I am sorry, didn't mean to.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/02/07 11:43 PM

No need to apologize. There's nothing against posting on any threads. That's what this place is for. Feel free.


-John
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/03/07 12:31 AM

mark

Sorry to hear you had such a poor training experience, if all you got from kata's practice was "dance"--they certainly were not doing a very good job.

Sounds like you were able to find the training you were looking for at some point--congrats! (seriously : ) )
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/03/07 03:33 AM

Cxt, how wonderfully patronising, great!!

I practiced Kata for 30 yrs, karate, TKD, Kung fu forms, Iadio, weapons kata.

I really ENJOYED learning and performing Kata, {I think I said that already}

But ALL kata is a pre arranged sequence of moves, just like a dance routine, that is simple fact.

As for Kata being able to develop a students physical, mental condition.. yes of course they do, just as a dance routine would.

May I quote Chens initial comment:

My first jab at it is that I dont think that kata are useful for anything other repetition of technique in which case there are far more valuable ways to do this

Only thing I would disagree with is, they are good for setting grading standard, and often very enjoyable, oh and a public display of Kata can get lots of trophies in the cabinet, very useful in showing what a “hardcase” someone is…..

mark
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/03/07 12:26 PM

mark

Did not really intend for it come across that way--sorry.

Kinda exactly why I put the term "seriously" and the "smily" in the post to try and avoid just that perception.

Nice of YOU to label all kata as a "dance" without takeing the time to distingush between your own personal opinions and experiences and EVREYONE ELSES.

I can assure you that experiences tend to vary considerably from person to person.

And labeling it such--on the heels of an 18 page discussion, might also be looked at with some degree irritation.

Again, did not mean to be patronizing, I owe you an "I'm sorry" for that perception.

Seriously.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/03/07 04:05 PM

Quote:

But ALL kata is a pre arranged sequence of moves, just like a dance routine, that is simple fact.



I disagree. but I DO agree that most people think and train that as fact. ...then again, most train with instructors who start teaching too early - they can only teach what they have learned. students only learn what they are taught.

someone who learns how to paint with a paint by numbers kit, might get bored of it after a while if they are never shown freehand painting.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/03/07 04:51 PM

mark,

You studied kata for thirty years and all you got out of it was a prearranged dance??!!! You poor guy. I just can't imagine it!!

Ever come across stuff like this?

www.iainabernethy.com

Then maybe reconsider your kata training methods?

Guess what? The moves are not linked pre-arranged multiple attacker scenarios... HELLO!!

When I started goju I was shown real self defense techniques directly from the kata I was learning.Block kick punch is for the wee tikes.
Posted by: Katana83

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/03/07 08:30 PM

Everybody has their own definition of kata. It is unfortunate that he only got a dance out of it, but hey, that is his interpretation and that is valid - for him. You and I have been able to get far more out of it. Perhaps because we didn't go into it with preconceived notions or heavy biases about what something is or isn't supposed to be. Perhaps we kept open minds and chose to grow within our training, and we eventually gained valuable benefits from it. There are a million definitions to what kata is or isn't. To that I say, "so what". The only people who truly know what they were intended for are their originial creators. Personally, I don't care what they are for because I am going to train them intensely and use them in a way that benefits me the most. Plus I really enjoy doing them .
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 01:54 AM

Yawn!

Slight semantic variation I think.

Questions:-

1, Are Kata a pre-arranged sequence of moves?
2, Is a dance routine a pre-arranged sequence of moves?
3, Does Kata provide {on its own} a system for learning defence skills?
4, Does Kata practice, develop muscle memory for only Air basics?

Now, I agree with the value of KATA, I enjoy Kata,

Brain, Applied Kata, is in fact partner work, using techniques found in Kata, as practically ALL techniques are found in Kata, can it be said that any partner work is applied Kata?

Ed, or is it most instructors hide behind Kata practice because they aren’t able to develop a students any other way?
After all Kata is often karate by numbers.

Teaching Kata too early, well im sure you would have me believe that it takes decades to fully understand the mystic, value of each Kata, so doesn’t EVERY instructor teach them too early?

Cxt, as for the “degree irritation.” ROFL, is that because the argument for Kata as a defence skills training system is so flawed, it doesn’t stand close, or even cursory examination?

TO REITERATE {seems so many don’t actually read a post properly}
Kata is of enormous benefit to a student, it is an intrinsic and integral part of Karate, I very much enjoy Kata.

AGAIN, I quote Chen Zen opening point:-

My first jab at it is that I dont think that kata are useful for anything other repetition of technique in which case there are far more valuable ways to do this

Mark

PS: perhaps it is ALL karate training that is flawed as defence skills system, not just the Kata practice?
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 08:09 AM

or perhaps it is YOUR karate training that was flawed as a defense skills system, not just the Kata practice?

some systems of karate don't use kata. some look at kata as a reference and spend less than 10% of their training time working forms - the other 90% of their time is spent on 2-person work.

if this thread really wants to destroy a myth, then a good place to start are these:

* kata is not trained in all systems of Karate.
* often, kata is not trained as a means for 'best self-defense'...nor is it claimed as such.
* kata, in some systems, use it as a reference for 2-person training. perhaps 'drills' at first, and progressing to more flowing work.
* ex-mcdojo kata students who woke up to their delusion, go on forums to complain how kata-based study betrayed them with the delusion their mckata training was for self-defense. ...but was it the kata? or the way the kata was used as a teaching tool by the sensei who lacked training and were themselves delusional?

* it doesn't take kata training to be delusional in MA. look at all the ninjas. ninjitsu isn't a kata-based art, yet delusion runs high in that field. There are delusional non-kata based gyms as well - I saw one place that taught how to take a knife-weilding attacker to the ground without first getting control of the weapon.

even worse than places advertising SD and not actually teaching any are the places teaching bad and dangerous self defense ...you don't need kata to learn delusionaly and you don't need to be studying kata to be delusional.

The TMA kata-based dojo's I've seen teach first and foremost, common sense. you have a gun in your face with someone asking for money - give them the money. a 'hard-core' SD student who learns in a testosterone ridden environment might have the inclination to attempt disarming a drugged-up desparate armed gangsta...

the least delusional wins.
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 10:19 AM

Ed. i seemed to have done well enough during my 20yrs on the doors.

BTW i notice that you didnt manage to answer my 4 questions.

Simple yes or no will be fine

Mark
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 11:57 AM

1, Are Kata a pre-arranged sequence of moves? No, but some use it that way.

2, Is a dance routine a pre-arranged sequence of moves? Yes, and there is also expressive dance routines ...which would be parallel to shadowboxing.

3, Does Kata provide {on its own} a system for learning defence skills? No, you also need a qualified instructor, training partner + sweat.

4, Does Kata practice, develop muscle memory for only Air basics? No, it develops muscle memory for using it in 2-person training....just like non-kata training does when doing solo drills in the air.
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 12:04 PM

INCREDIBLE!!!!

Kata is not a prearranged sequence of moves!!! So a student can adlib when ever they feel like it? FFS Ed you can talk bollox.

As for Kata developing muscle memory in partner training……………. OMG!! You ever actually hit anything but the air?

Hey what ever Ed, Keep at the Hiean Shodan, just as long as you enjoy it.

mark
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 01:11 PM

mark

You know, I said I was sorry--honestly didn't mean it the way you took it.

You responded to my "Im sorry" by being a horses-arse.

Works for me--now I don't have to feel guilty about shredding you.

First--most of your ahm...."thinking" about this topic has already been done--over the past 18 pages.
So before you "re-tred" stuff that has already been handled--please do us all a favor and at least TRY and read the thread.

Perhpas you can pay someone to read it to you---comprehension clearly not being your strong suit.

As an example, I need look no futher than your logically challanged attempts to use YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE with kata as a example for ALL PEOPLES EXPEIENCE with kata.

No doubt you also ahm...."think" that since YOU suffer from erectile disfunction--then we ALL do.

Yep, if mark can't do it--then nobody can!!!!

Yep, physics don't work cause you can't get the math right.
Yep, computers can't be programmed cause you can't actually program very well.
Yep, planes can't actually fly because you can't work the math for how they stay up.
Yep, cars don't run because you can't figure out how to make an engine.
Yep, I didn't actually watch somebody make plasma in lab because mark does not know how to do that.
Yep, I didn't actually eat a great pastery last night because mark has not shown he can make one.

Yep, it does not work for mark--then it works for nobody in the whole wide world or the entire history of humankind.

Rriiiiigggghhhhtttt.

See, that is exactly when people do research they don't just ask ONE person or do ONE test.

The world works a bit differently than that.
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 01:31 PM

Shall i consider myself "shredded" now ?
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 01:42 PM

mark

Yep, "shredded" is exactly what I did your base/foundational arguement.

(Plus I was amuseing myself.)

Namely that you somehow seem to feel that the limits of your own personal expereince to be the actual limits OF experience.

You are very effecent (sp) however.

Most folks have make 2 different posts in order to be assert unbelivavble arrogence and seriously jacked up logic.

You pull it off in a single post.

Way to go!
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 01:44 PM

lol. you are reading what you want, so theres no use trying to get the point accross.

cxt,
when people like mark look at kata...he sees a sequence of prearraingements (and by his own admission, he's been just dancing for 20 years). others see examples of principles.

principles of body mechanics to AID study of self-defense.

what is so hard about that concept for people? it follows the same framework as non-kata based learning.

can't really have a conversation with people who choose to bash kata practice based on their own wasted efforts.


mark, just curious...what first tipped you off that kata was useless? was that when your sensei told you that kata was for fighting multiple attackers in all directions with 'bunkai' that entails each person attacking one at a time? or perhaps it was an attempt to do naihanchi in a bar fight to restore your girlfriend's honor...but instead left you pummled and sleeping alone?

am I close?

Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 01:54 PM

Ed

Because unlike mark, most folks don't assume that if they can't make it work--that it DOES NOT WORK.

I had a plumbing problem over the holidays--couldnt figure out why the pressure was not coming back up.
Didn't throw my hands into the air and go "well if I can't figure it out and get it to work then it CAN'T be done."
Called a plumber--and he fixed it in jiffy.

I just didn't know ENOUGH--and I didn't blame the plumber or the plumbing itself for MY lack of skills.

What I don't get is the need people have to bash folks.

Somebody don't like kata?

Does not work for them?

Fine, never said they had too or that it would.

Don't understand the need people have to bash its practice or the people that do it.

I understand that people have poor experiences--but they should take that up with their OWN teachers--not everybody else.

marks poor expereinces are NOT my fault.

Honestly sorry he had a poor experience---but why should he be makeing his problems mine?
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 02:22 PM

ROFL!! I’m so glad that I can get such a bite, really makes my day winding up sanctimonious fragile people.

Thanks for the entertainment Ed and Cxt, I can see you in my mind frothing at the keyboard…

Thanks so very much guys….

Mark

PS: Opinions are like Arse holes, everyone has one and they are all full of Sh*t.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 02:51 PM

mark

Yes, I agree, "everyone has one"--INCLUDING YOURSELF--and yours at least IS "full of Sh*t."

Weird though--you first start out by useing your singuler, personal, individual experience to be valid for each and every person on the planet--and lets not forget the whole of history.

Now your saying that everyone has an opinon and they all pretty much suck.

So which one is your posit again?

Do we listen to you now--or listen to what you wrote before?

And are you going to contradict yourself again on your next post?
Only ask because there is little use in speaking with a guy that can't keep his OWN story stright.

Ok...... let me get this stright--YOU lecture everyone ELSE as to the value of their practice--BUT "we" are the "sanctimonius" ones???

You do understand what the word "sanctimonious" actually means don't you????
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 03:06 PM

You miss the point, I was simply trying to get a bite from someone and then play with them. I simply enjoy it.

You stepped up brilliantly, thanks again

Getting you to rant on so much was highly entertaining. Keep it up.

As for my little motto, MOST defiantly Applies to me, even when im being straight..

Mark
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 03:19 PM

cxt, he changed his strategy at 2:22 today since at 2:18 I posted this:
http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...=0#Post15911013

...so now he's not serious, he's just 'toying' with us, you see.


*** "This has been a test of the emergency BS system.....if this had been actual BS, you would have been instructed to seek a qualified instructor in your area.....we now return you to the regular thread." ******
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 03:23 PM

mark

And what exactly makes you think that I don't equally enjoy mocking purposeful idiots--such as yourself?

(a very differnt thing then the "real" kind)

Why would you think that you were not providing at least as much fun for "me" as "you" were getting??

Weird--and very self-centered of you--whoops, already establised that!

Riddle me this.

If you were being an arse merely for the jollies you get out of it--your STILL being an arse.

Don't know, but it really does not sound like that is all that good a plan to me.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 03:27 PM

Ed



Thats the only cool thing about trolls and [censored].

Nobody cares how much they cry.

I'd actually feel bad if I spoke to a "real" person like that--but a self admitted troll?

Nah, can sleep easy tonight.
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 03:27 PM

RANT RANT FROTH FROTH........
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 03:33 PM

mark

Actually that probably would be better as:

"Rant-Rant"---"Froth-Froth."

Your way was easier, but it lacked something--so with my way--if you say it outloud with a little "pauses" indicated by the little lines it "sounds" better--more cutting.

Might also help if you would roll your eyes.

Please feel free to ask for any other help you might need.

Can't promise I can help--don't know everything of course, but its a safe bet I know more than you.

Your right--it IS fun to jack with people online for no good reason or purpose.

And here I was worried that I would have nothing to do while the class was on break.
Posted by: Katana83

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 07:04 PM

1. Yes they are. You learn them and you train them. Once you become proficient in them, you add variations to them and you can mix them up. You can even pressure test them until you can do them proficiently with someone bearing down on you and actually making contact with you. Some people even do them on the beach against the pull of the tide. They are a training tool, after all.
2. It all depends on the dance that you are doing. Some people freestyle it, and some people do classical dance. Freestyle is based on the principle of improvisation, and classical dance is a prearranged sequence of moves. They are both outstanding forms of expression and they both get the job done equally well, so what is the problem? Btw, did you know that several outstanding styles of martial arts worldwide, even in the west, have roots in folk dance? Do your research before parroting the opinions of others and presenting them as your own personal fact.
3. Here we go again. Fortunately I am used to dealing with narrow minded people like you. Defence is such a wide ranging area and includes so many variables that there is no one system that can meet all of the requirements. Kata is only a single training tool that is used in many different ways by many different teachers and in varying amounts. Some teachers spend a long time on the subject and make it a major part of the training. Some teachers only train it because it is a requirement for advancement. Some teachers teach bunkai from it, and some teachers teach kata and defence as totally separate components. Can it be a defence system? Certainly - IF YOU TRAIN IT THAT WAY. You can isolate the techniques and principles and use them to create your own personal defence system. Again, don't knock something just because you are too narrowminded to make it work for YOU. Kata can be anything you want it to be, it is up to you - YOU are the one who is doing the training.
4. Kata practice develops many things, muscle memory only being one of them. As far as air basics go, it all comes down to your teacher. Personally, my teacher required me to learn air basics as a beginner so that I would learn to control my technique, then he made me use those 'air' techniques in full contact free sparring so that I would be able to do them under pressure against a fully resisting opponent. It is much better than some hotheaded moron throwing techniques all over the place because he didn't want to take the time to learn how to properly execute a technique - most likely due to a popular martial artist's narrowminded rant about how punching and kicking the air is useless, but that is another thread. Kata practice develops muscle memory for air basics if you train it to do so. Such gross generalizations about kata only doing 'this' or 'that' are laughable at best and downright ignorant at worst. Kata, and many other things in the martial arts, have a limitless amount of uses. You are only limited by your narrow mind.

Another thing, what is it with you and this attitude? Develop students to do what? Be ignorant street fighters who are out to prove that they have a stick and two balls? Different people study martial arts for different reasons. Did you know that some people can already defend themselves before they become martial artists ? It is not all about fighting, you know? Victory is never a guarantee even in the most idea situation, so why would you only train to learn how to fight? Didn't your old man take you out back and teach you how to handle yourself? Heck, didn't you get beat up enough in grade school to know how to throw hands? Martial arts offer many benefits in many areas of your life, and they are fun hobbies, too. Don't insult someone or their training just becuase they aren't hardpressed to turn themselves into some macho street fighter who can live out their tough guy fantasy. Not everybody is trying to be Rambo or Bruce Lee. Some people train because they enjoy it, and they see something more than just people fighting. It all comes back to the same message - shut your mouth and open your mind!
Posted by: Katana83

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 07:18 PM

Quote:

cxt, he changed his strategy at 2:22 today since at 2:18 I posted this:
http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...=0#Post15911013

...so now he's not serious, he's just 'toying' with us, you see.


*** "This has been a test of the emergency BS system.....if this had been actual BS, you would have been instructed to seek a qualified instructor in your area.....we now return you to the regular thread." ******




The truth is, he was serious, but his narrowminded bashing spree was stopped cold in its tracks by good ole' fashioned common sense. He got and that is his exit strategy. We didn't bash his training, he bashed ours and he got put in his place. Now suddenly he was only toying with us. For all of his talk you would think that he has the courage to own up to it. Seems like just another net martial artist, you know - the ones who read a bunch of articles on the internet then swear up and down that something is absolutely 'this' or 'that'. Pathetic.
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 10:13 PM

Hello Moderator Kogas:



<<Everything you can do solo, you can do and do better with a living human being in front of you.

Your words or his, ~sire~? Can I learn, obviously, can I engrain surely... but the one thing I can do solo is study an idea, a physical position/technique without another person pressuring me... yet . (Yet being the critical word of course).

I am not taking the other body out of the equasion, merely using it merely at a later time in the study*w!o

Jeff
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 10:23 PM

Hello Mark:

<<the time I spent practicing kata was time I wasn’t practicing martial arts, I was practicing dance….

Could that have been misunderstood practice/instruction respectively? Have you observed kata which were not "dance" (pejoritively<sp.?>)...?

Jeff
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 10:32 PM

Hello Brian:

<<Block kick punch is for the wee tikes.

I do not know if it is merely for "wee tikes". Myself I do not want to be struck by anything that someone has been practicing the hitting of you/I with for 10, 15, 20 years... no thanks!

If in place of ~wee tikes~, we said instead training for larger groups of people then I think might explain one layer of the issue pretty cleanly. The ~wee tikes~ business gets kind of shaky if the schools/students in question were older than what we might be conceiving. All depends on what age that "school instruction" occured exactly....



Jeff
Posted by: Ronin1966

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 11:00 PM

Hello Mark:



<<1, Are Kata a pre-arranged sequence of moves?

By definition, yes. Somebody's ideas/concepts passed in physical form between two people.

<<2, Is a dance routine a pre-arranged sequence of moves?

Depends on who's "leading"

<<3, Does Kata provide {on its own} a system for learning defence skills?

Yes, if I think/am taught them in those terms. If I never explore them by working with hundreds of people sizes, temperments, I cannot see what they say about the given problem-issue uncovered...

<<4, Does Kata practice, develop muscle memory for only Air basics?

Only if I use them solo...

<<can it be said that any partner work is applied Kata?

I certainly would....

<<most instructors hide behind Kata practice because they aren’t able to develop a students any other way?

If you/I have a physical skill to share with people who wish to learn said skill, there is a certain rote routine we give us all to start. With it, we learn quickly all ,manner of things about someone.

If we teach a lot of different people, the need for a common starting point, at minimum a starting routine/proceedure seems necessary. Otherwise too much chaos in the group to be able to share anything.

<<After all Kata is often karate by numbers.



<<to fully understand the mystic, value of each Kata

I missed your conversation with Ed where you were apparently discussing the ~mysticism of kata~ (???) in some manner... (I will likely therefore get this completely wrong.... but here goes anyway...)

Working with all kinds of body types, ages, temperments, techniques fail. They realize/know what is happening and freeze you out, are physical "anamolies", whatever the case might be. With me so far? It will take me the rest of my life (and I am a sloooooooooooow learner) to have run into all these different "ooooops" enough times to have worked out the particular solutions someone will present. On that level alone, its not mystical, its insanity... ie what am I still doing studying this stuff for years, I should be home, resting my sore hip watching the ~pabhlem channel~ on TV. Nope, I like this stuff, and enjoy the challenge... "what do I do if grabbed this way instead... what does this kata say about that... It takes forever to peel this onion and digest it

Merely my musings, forgive my non-brevity,
Jeff
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/04/07 11:26 PM

Bump
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 10:43 AM

Quote:

Hello Brian:

<<Block kick punch is for the wee tikes.

I do not know if it is merely for "wee tikes". Myself I do not want to be struck by anything that someone has been practicing the hitting of you/I with for 10, 15, 20 years... no thanks!

If in place of ~wee tikes~, we said instead training for larger groups of people then I think might explain one layer of the issue pretty cleanly. The ~wee tikes~ business gets kind of shaky if the schools/students in question were older than what we might be conceiving. All depends on what age that "school instruction" occured exactly....



Jeff





Maybe that wee tikes was a bit overboard. But that is an aspect of kata that is taught at many schools and then nothing else is ever revealed. Could be that the instructor doesn't know any other aspects of kata himself. THEN,students of kata who know twenty or so kata whine about how ineffective,boring,useless,or stupid kata is. (Like Ed said) Well guess what? The training is to blame,not the kata!!!
Posted by: Khayman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 01:51 PM

Quote:

Now suddenly he was only toying with us. For all of his talk you would think th Seems like just another net martial artist, you know - the ones who read a bunch of articles on the internet then swear up and down that something is absolutely 'this' or 'that'. Pathetic.




Good one Mark, youve given me a reason to start reading this site again. Hilarious

So now you are a net martial artist Mark, lol
So me, Mr V, Sharon etc training under you must have been figments of our imagination??? That ust make us net martial artists too.lol

By the way Ed, you never stopped mark in his tracks, you picked on a random group of Yoseikan practitioners who have nothing to do with our old group maybe researching yoseikan properly would have been a better course of action otherwise we could pick a random goju club and say thats you that is, thats what you do???

This thread has been very entertaining though, maybe something to do with the legendary british wit and sarcasm

edited to fix quote
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 02:28 PM

Hi Khayman,

This Forum isn’t like it was years ago, so many fragile people with bubbles to burst. Everyone takes it so seriously, I just have fun

Any Way, Mr Khayman, it seems that if we practice Heain Shodan enough, the secrets of the universe will be unlocked to us... ..left forward stance , left low level block...

Yes yes, i can feel it coming, Praise the lord!!!!! Martial salvation is at hand!!!!

Mark
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 02:43 PM


if someone can act serious, then change gears when it suits them and say 'I was just playing'...then it becomes a non-conversation. maybe you could get away with that crap on forums 3 years ago....but thats exactly what it is: crap.

I have to assume his comment having 30 years of MA experience was 'just playing' too.

conclusion: troll. g'bye.


ps. "I'm just playin" lol
Posted by: Khayman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 02:58 PM

Quote:

Hi Khayman,

This Forum isn’t like it was years ago, so many fragile people with bubbles to burst. Everyone takes it so seriously, I just have fun

Any Way, Mr Khayman, it seems that if we practice Heain Shodan enough, the secrets of the universe will be unlocked to us... ..left forward stance , left low level block...

Yes yes, i can feel it coming, Praise the lord!!!!! Martial salvation is at hand!!!!

Mark





Not been the same since Mr V left.
However you have to remember Heian Shodan is the centre of the universe. I remember a high ranking karateka coming to wado class we were visiting and teaching Heian Shodan as a very special kata they would never have seen before. I remember looking over at Mr V and us both trying to keep a straight face.

Yes Ed, if I have been training 24 years then I would hope my instructor had been training a few more than me, lol. How long have you been actively training Ed?
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 03:07 PM

Quote:



By the way Ed, you never stopped mark in his tracks, you picked on a random group of Yoseikan practitioners who have nothing to do with our old group maybe researching yoseikan properly would have been a better course of action otherwise we could pick a random goju club and say thats you that is, thats what you do???




sure...because "I'm just having fun".


http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...rue#Post1576870
"If you try google with Yoseikan Budo you can get to the main Yoseikan World Federation page."

guess what?...I googled "Yoseikan uk" and it came up on the first hit with a website having a 10 year old sensei.
http://www.yoseikan.co.uk/page7.html


so was it kata-based learning at Yoseikan or wasn't it? and was mark doing Shotokan simultaneously with Yoseikan for 20 years? ...or does Yoseikan have Shotokan kata?

oh wait...or was mark kidding about those things too?
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 03:12 PM

not that it's on topic, but I've been doing Goju longer than you've been dancing.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 03:16 PM

Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 03:40 PM

ROFL ED Clutching at straws.

I have constantly said, in this thread that I both practice and enjoy kata.

And I really was just trying to get a bite and see who I could wind up, 1st prize goes to Ed.

Yes I was practicing shotokan simultaneously to yoseikan Budo, is that beyond you abilities to practice 2 disciplines or does your Kata provide you with all the skills you need?

And as I said in the other thread the 10yrs old sensei and his group are nothing to do with me.

But keep it coming dancing man, I really am entertained.

mark

PS: I love the way Chen Zen starts this then sits back and watches all the fun
Posted by: Khayman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 03:46 PM

Quote:

Quote:



By the way Ed, you never stopped mark in his tracks, you picked on a random group of Yoseikan practitioners who have nothing to do with our old group maybe researching yoseikan properly would have been a better course of action otherwise we could pick a random goju club and say thats you that is, thats what you do???




sure...because "I'm just having fun".


http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...rue#Post1576870
"If you try google with Yoseikan Budo you can get to the main Yoseikan World Federation page."

guess what?...I googled "Yoseikan uk" and it came up on the first hit with a website having a 10 year old sensei.
http://www.yoseikan.co.uk/page7.html


so was it kata-based learning at Yoseikan or wasn't it? and was mark doing Shotokan simultaneously with Yoseikan for 20 years? ...or does Yoseikan have Shotokan kata?

oh wait...or was mark kidding about those things too?




Now Ed, Mark may have been playing with you but you took a swipe at my style and thats what I am taking offense to. Especially as you picked a random site (that we have no links with you found it because it is new) Look at the links posted in the Yoseikan thread you created for more info on vernon bell.

To answer your question the Yoseikan Karate style I learnt was the full budo style this included the shotokan kata but not just restricted to it. Kata is not my bag as I was always geared towards the jitsu side. But thats my personal preference.
Posted by: oldman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 04:25 PM

Yes, things have changed since the days of Mr V.. Who'd have ever imagined you would have multiple Karateka arguing the value of Kata on the jeet kun do forum.
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 05:25 PM

mark

Nope, "first prize" goes the internet troll who gets his jollies by derailing a decent discussion by being nasty and stirring the pot--again, so he can get his self admitted "kicks."

Poor way for one to get ones "jollies."

Where there no childrens sand castles to kick over? Or old people to trip?
No prank phome calls to make?

But its not all bad---I did so enjoy slapping you around, made a pretty boreing day go a bit faster.
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 08:01 PM

Quote:

Now Ed, Mark may have been playing with you but you took a swipe at my style and thats what I am taking offense to. Especially as you picked a random site (that we have no links with you found it because it is new) Look at the links posted in the Yoseikan thread you created for more info on vernon bell.



could you show me where I took a swipe at 'your' style? first, I asked about the style in a separate thread and didn't make a connection to you or mark - address it there if you want. second, I took the first link and the wikipedia link. The first link happened to have a 10 year old 'sensei' and mention of Vernon Bell. That's not taking a swipe at 'your' style, that was just what they chose to publicly show as representing that style in the UK. If anything, it's THEM that are taking the swipe at 'your' style.

Quote:

To answer your question the Yoseikan Karate style I learnt was the full budo style this included the shotokan kata but not just restricted to it. Kata is not my bag as I was always geared towards the jitsu side. But thats my personal preference.


I didn't ask what style you learned, I asked if the style has kata as a training tool (since kata is what's on topic for this thread).

so, if you answer my question, then this thread can stay on topic. when you and mark studied Yoseikan, was there kata study or wasn't there?
Posted by: Khayman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 09:02 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Now Ed, Mark may have been playing with you but you took a swipe at my style and thats what I am taking offense to. Especially as you picked a random site (that we have no links with you found it because it is new) Look at the links posted in the Yoseikan thread you created for more info on vernon bell.



could you show me where I took a swipe at 'your' style? first, I asked about the style in a separate thread and didn't make a connection to you or mark - address it there if you want. second, I took the first link and the wikipedia link. The first link happened to have a 10 year old 'sensei' and mention of Vernon Bell. That's not taking a swipe at 'your' style, that was just what they chose to publicly show as representing that style in the UK. If anything, it's THEM that are taking the swipe at 'your' style.

Quote:

To answer your question the Yoseikan Karate style I learnt was the full budo style this included the shotokan kata but not just restricted to it. Kata is not my bag as I was always geared towards the jitsu side. But thats my personal preference.


I didn't ask what style you learned, I asked if the style has kata as a training tool (since kata is what's on topic for this thread).

so, if you answer my question, then this thread can stay on topic. when you and mark studied Yoseikan, was there kata study or wasn't there?





Common Ed, Mark had been annoying you for a while, you knew what style he practised and looked for it on the net why else post it as we had previously discussed the style on various threads in the past. I dont think you have bothered looking back at the yoseikan thread which I answered earlier.
I used this site as a valuable source in the past, mark likes to have his fun so do you, however, at least he admits to enjoying the arguements.lol
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 09:45 PM

yes, fun is good. people full of BS is where the real fun is at. and mark is lugging a heavy load. I'm having fun pointing that out.

Quote:

ED, As both Mark and I have previously stated for the nth time yoseikan does have kata.



thanks. sorry that I missed it.

ok, so yoseikan does have kata, but they teach it as dance....good to know next time someone asks me.

Quote:

mark: I practiced Kata for 30 yrs, karate, TKD, Kung fu forms, Iadio, weapons kata.



sounds like a nice blend...lets name it:
"Crouching Samurai, Hidden Wave Form"

haha...see, I can have fun.
Posted by: Lokkan-Do

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 09:50 PM

Chen nothing you say will stop people from practicing martial arts that interest them.

The kata might not be a good way to train with todays fitness gadgets, but that does not mean training them will make your fighting skills poor. Repitiion does have benefit...I am sure new students at your gym spend some time rehearsing punches in the air or lightly touchig focus pads to perfect their form...kata is just a heavy emphasis on proper form, correct breathing, proper use of strength and other strategies..like Fa Jing (ask internal arts forum what this is, they can explain better) or better yet go to a good Tai Chi school and let them show you during the first class/free trial class if available.

Have you ever heard of a Kempo based art called Katsu-Do? It's basically the moves from kata trained in a sportative fashion (MMA).

Luke
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 10:04 PM

Wow, that was a little out of left feild but okay. No problem.

I know the concept of Fa jing. Personally, Im not an internal arts kinda guy. No offense, I just need more proof than simple speculation and ancient mysticism. Im also not the student in the dojo who learns all the foriegn and ancient terms associated with my style either.

Im not trying to change anyone. Im instead trying to inform people. I WISH that someone would have turned me on to the training I do now when I first started. I went through years of doing the same old thing with TMA and it was junk for the most part. I understand that isnt everyones experience but it was mine. I dont study my art for philosophy I study and pracctice to win. I want to win. No matter what the situation or who the opponent is I want to win everytime. With that sort of goal, it leaves little time for the "softer" aspects of martial training.
Posted by: Khayman

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/05/07 10:23 PM

Kata is not really my bag it has benefits but I do not see it as the overiding root to the art. Whilst training at university I had the oppertunity to train with martial artists from around the world. Every year there would be an intake of new students many of whom had trained before.
Some of the higher grades that came to train with us were excellent at kata far better than I could ever be but it was interesting to put a kick shield infront of them and get them to move someone backwards with a kick or punch. All of them had trained kihon and kata but few had actually hit anything with force. The key is a mixture of all these elements.
Posted by: Lokkan-Do

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/06/07 05:24 PM

I agree, before alot of asian arts were modernised (adapted to be safer for civilian teaching (e.g. Ju Jitsu, Judo) some things were taken away from them..for arts had have alot of strkes and stand up grappling..strength/resistance training was one of them.

If you train kata and also do freestyle fighting, along with heavy bag training you should be okay.

I cannot remember the name for it..in karate the advance ranks do (in addition to prearranged sparring)...sparring where all kinds of techniques are used including throws and some grappling (however not much of it is done on the ground unless they study kempo or some karate style that also has ground work..
Posted by: Lokkan-Do

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/06/07 05:32 PM

Quote:

Im also not the student in the dojo who learns all the foriegn and ancient terms associated with my style either.




Well no one can force you to do that..but look at it this way..it's sign of respect.

Here in Canada if you do not speak French when dealing with certain customers they make a big deal out of it. I believe the language and culture thing is just a way of showing appreciation for the roots or culture/country from which the art came from.

It might just be pride or arrogance but people generally do want to be respected. In you to to France as a tourist and try to speak with the locals in French they will not talk to you...they are very arrogant (they know english but the insist you learn some French before you to their country). Someone has to say it because it's true.


I am sure if an english man went to China to teach Savate he would expect the same of his students..for them to learn the english terms that is. It would also make it easier for him to teach them if they learn some "gym english" as he works on learning Madarin.

Quote:


Im not trying to change anyone. Im instead trying to inform people. I WISH that someone would have turned me on to the training I do now when I first started. I went through years of doing the same old thing with TMA and it was junk for the most part. I understand that isnt everyones experience but it was mine. I dont study my art for philosophy I study and pracctice to win. I want to win. No matter what the situation or who the opponent is I want to win everytime. With that sort of goal, it leaves little time for the "softer" aspects of martial training.





That's good Chen, personally I agree with you...I have a friend right now who is learning kempo (he is new to the martial arts) but he won't listen to me when I tell him he is being ripped off...he is paying $84 CDN dollars a month and he is the only one in the class who is at least 5 feet, 10 inches...all the rest are women and children and he actually believes he will get the type of training that will save him in a fight (lack of proper training partners). I cannot tell him anything though..I have to leave him to find out on this own.


It's okay to inform but the tone of your title is a bit sour to start with.



"resistance versus non-resistance training might be a better title" this way you identify the topic without specifically targeting artists that practice kata. Those Krav Maga guys (some schools not all) don't seem to have this concept down either.



I think a better way to get your message across is this: if you go to a gym for 3 months and nothing you learn can work on a fully resisting opponent...you should look for another school. Now, it might not be the art, it might be the instructor, it might be your training partners (much smaller than you) or it can be the way that school teaches their techniques. Be careful not to assume what you learnt is workable in such a situation...try it out! Do in the gym/dojo with a training partner..if you cannot do this..then you are wasting your time..find another place to train.

For those that think their training is slow for a reason and it will take them somewhere eventually...they may be right or wrong..but we need to leave it up to them to find out.

I wouldn't mind spending the rest of my life learning Tai Chi..I am sure I will become better after doing those boring repititve forms over and over for 10 years. Again there is some benefit in repitition and it's not myth...just go to a Tai Chi school and see for yourself.

I learnt how to do a Fa Jing trick my first class and now I am still skeptical of stories I have heard but also somewhat of a beliver that Tai Chi has something interesting to offer...I understand this Fa Jing things has limitations as to how it can be used and I was also told that this is the same concept used in Aikido to throw much larger opponents.

BTW, the Tai Chi instructor threw me while keeping his body completely relaxed and while I was putting up a struggle to prevent his technique from working..he then taught me how to throw him..ALL IN THE FIRST CLASS! It might not be the answer to a the greater number of self-defense situations but it is something rather interesting to experience about the human body and it's limitations. I can't help to wonder if a Judoka who trains fulling resisting opponents every day might find this trick useful.


Lok
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/07/07 12:47 PM

I might be late the gate,lol,though I have recently been given the idea that Kata/form/patterns contain lots of moves meaning different things,some being for combat,some are from theatre,some are old chinese gymnastics,some moves have religouse meaning,shamen,Taoist,hindu etc,some are secret society symbols,some moves tell a story in motion and some are simply fancy displays and some moves other things...all within one form,making it difficult to find what was meant to be for combat.

Too me this makes sense.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/07/07 09:44 PM

Yeah, I admit the title was probably a little off color. It was an inside joke to BrianS. I was in the karate section and we had sort of stole a thread so I jokingly said I would write a thread entitle as it is. Then I did, just to mess with him a little, it really wasnt meant to disrespect anyone.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/08/07 09:58 PM



psst...Chen secretly does seiunchin.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/09/07 12:40 AM

Oh no my dark secret is out!
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/09/07 11:32 PM

Quote:



psst...Chen secretly does seiunchin.




..that he learned from JKogas.
Posted by: Chen Zen

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/12/07 01:14 AM

Oh no!! Thats horrible. Go put on your white PJ's and your little pink belt so I can at least show you the proper way to do it.
Posted by: mark

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/23/07 11:16 AM

Sorry to reopen this, but can i just ask if this is kata or dance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miR1P6nEkzc

What does Ed think?

Mark
Posted by: cxt

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/23/07 11:49 AM

mark

Its one of the "evil" XMA things.

I'm pretty sure that its mentioned in the Book of Revelations as a sign of the coming End of the World

And if I have to look at it much longe that is exactly what I'm praying for.

My eyes, my eyes!!!!!!!!!

(cute girl however)
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/24/07 12:32 AM

Quote:

this is kata or dance?



neither. it's a martialy-themed acrobatic performance loosely timed to music....and a good one at that.

the only difference to dance would be if the movements had more adherence to the rhythm with less regard for the structure of movements (eg it would be dance if it were more expression and less confined structure- the martial theme overshadows the expression).

a fine line, but it's just my subjective opinion.

pure acrobatics want to show as first and foremost, their physical ability limited only by that ability and their imagination to demonstrate that ability.

dance is movement as rhythmic expression, usually to music.

pantomime is the non-verbal telling of a story or message using gestures to invoke emotion or feeling.


any movement or theme of movement can be used for dance, acrobatics or pantomime. If someone chooses to base any one of these performances on what used to be kata, then we can say the theme of the performance is martially based.

It's recorded that there have been Chinese street performers of quan since at least the 18th century...some simply peddlers...and later some as an 'advertisement' to their school (which often doubled as a front for some type of underlaying cause or cultlike gang or even political faction) for a sort of hidden in plain sight recruitment to their 'way'.

Okinawan folk dances (which are more like a pantomime, except not called that since the stories they tell are long lost and just the movements remain...so they call it dance) ...I'm convinced they are martially based. Some of the more modern ones which perhaps don't tell any story seem directly influenced from classical martial-based kata.

basing a routine on kata, exagurating and embelishing the movements in order to demonstrate physical ability is martial acrobatics...or themed gymnastics. kata performance competitions in front of judges often fall in this category with varying levels of exagurated movement. and the two-person 'bunaki' competitions I've seen just look like an extension of that 'performance over function' goal.

people only know what kata can be used for with what they are shown...since performance Arts are the ones making money - thats the way most people have gravitated to using kata for over the years. So, increasingly people will call a performance 'kata', when in fact it resembles less and less of what it was based on...in the process losing what the kata can be used for.

However, if they only need kata to demonstrate performance to an audience or judge: they dont need to care what else kata can be used for.


Besides, regardless of the theme a performance takes...it's the physical ability itself that mostly would help a person defend themselves. all things equal, with no MA training - I'd think someone in good shape, flexible and healthy has a much better chance of fending off attack than someone who is not. Basing on just the video, the person doing the performance probably wouldn't have any better chance fighting an equal weight and sized non-MA gymnast or acrobat. Just because the theme is martial-based...don't necessarily make the performer a better fighter than someone doing an equally demanding routine with a different theme. Same with dojo's practicing forms with no intention to move the student into understanding fighting principles within the form.


There's no proof of what kata was 'originally' intended for, but what I believe is that kata is simply one of many training aides to learn principles of personal weaponless defense.

Trying to use it as such comes with the assumption that one is learning the kata from someone who knows how to teach it this way. One thing is certain: kata was meant to be transmitted in person over a period of years from someone who has learned how to use it for training. ...not transmitted via youtube for people to 'learn the moves' of a competition dance step.


Posted by: JKogas

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/24/07 06:52 AM

Quote:

Sorry to reopen this, but can i just ask if this is kata or dance?






Define dance and you'll have your answer.


-John
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/24/07 08:45 PM

mark has been banned.
Posted by: BaguaMonk

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 01/28/07 09:10 PM

I love all the Bruce Lee wannabe's, they amuse me. Even Bruce Lee found usefulness in katas/forms, he just didn't stick to them like some divine gospel like alot of traditionalists do.

You are asking karatekas. why don't you try asking someone who practiced the root CMA arts instead?

To me, forms have, and never will be a method of fighting, or even a way of practicing them solo. Forms are merely tools to develop specific body types, energetic principles, power generation, flexibility, strength (stances), fluidity (in CMA), power, etc. In no way is it useful for fighting alone, but it is useful in many other ways if you know how to.

For example, in IMA, Taiji/bagua/xingyi, you would be nothing without the practice of your forms. The forms give you both the internal, and external components in which to devleop your body and mind as a tool. But NEVER have I ever thoguht the "techniques" to be used the way they are used in the form. Only karatekas/shaolin guys think IMA techniques are used straight out of the form. In the simplest external techniques, you are merely learning principles. In the more subtle movements, you are learning the correct body mechanics, generation of power from subtle muscles, which way direction of physical force is going, how to articulate your body together (without tension) to lead it to its destianation, etc. Never, for fighting alone.

The misuse of katas/forms and lack of understanding from MMA/JKD guys, comes from just that-ignorance.
Posted by: jude33

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 05/01/07 03:35 PM

Quote:

You are asking karatekas. why don't you try asking someone who practiced the root CMA arts instead?




What is CMA?

Quote:


To me, forms have, and never will be a method of fighting, or even a way of practicing them solo.



I think I dissagree

Quote:


Forms are merely tools to develop specific body types, energetic principles, power generation, flexibility, strength (stances), fluidity (in CMA), power, etc.




I tend to agree apart from the merely part
Quote:

In no way is it useful for fighting alone,



Tend not to agree
Quote:


but it is useful in many other ways if you know how to.




Tend to agree
Quote:


For example, in IMA, Taiji/bagua/xingyi, you would be nothing without the practice of your forms. The forms give you both the internal, and external components in which to devleop your body and mind as a tool. But NEVER have I ever thoguht the "techniques" to be used the way they are used in the form.




Yes they can be with a little variation of the when and how to use the technique(s)

Quote:


Only karatekas/shaolin guys think IMA techniques are used straight out of the form. In the simplest external techniques, you are merely learning principles. In the more subtle movements, you are learning the correct body mechanics, generation of power from subtle muscles, which way direction of physical force is going, how to articulate your body together (without tension) to lead it to its destianation, etc. Never, for fighting alone.

The misuse of katas/forms and lack of understanding from MMA/JKD guys, comes from just that-ignorance.




Hi.I think the miss understanding of kata comes from the bunkia that would never work in a million years in a practical sitution. From the kata in my study's the techiques work

Well in some cases what you have written I agree but in others I disagree. It seems to me from what I have seen of my studies that the techniques in some kenpo arts practiced(none kata) have their roots in chinese and then later karate forms.

They can and do work. Learn the stand alone technique and thats it. Learn the kata and variations keep appearing for different applications.
Posted by: Taison

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 05/05/07 10:50 AM

CMA - Chinese Martial Art

-Taison out
Posted by: Demonologist437

Re: Chen Destroys the kata myth - 06/06/07 12:10 PM

For one, I don't think anybody has said anything condemning the applications Mr. Monk laid out. If I recall, it was the idea that practicing kata by itself could replace the need for alive, dynamic two person training. That, I would verily disagree with.

I practice Taiji forms and JKD. I cut out the karate katas however because they gave me very little. Perhaps other more, but me very little.

Further, looking at this from the perspective of any martial system or style("root" arts or otherwise) would sort of smear bias on the final answer, yes?

Also, not to pick, but I don't think calling anyone ignorant is going to help. We can't all be expected to pracicte one another's respective art.

Lastly, I'd say that as far as katas go(though it's probably the obvious answer), do as you will. If it seems to wokr for you, or you enjoy, kata your little heart out. Nobody can really stop anyone from doing that, and I have run into very effective practioners who still practice kata with seriousness. I wouldn't blame that soley on forms training, but if it works for them, great.

As the man said, "Research your own experience."
If it works, go with it. At the same time though, I'd say to keep an open mind if situations change.

Personally, I quit practicing my kata and I in no way regret it. However, I sure as hell wouldn't tell my old sensei that if I saw him again...